Why didn’t the Hindus of India ever defeat an invading army!

[magra]

You clearly don't get it,.regardless of whatever excuse you pull next but It's British that created the kolkata,Bengalore etc cities and India has one of the most extensive railway lines and infrastructure in asia for that era,courtesy of the British,suddenly India became the largest manufacturer of textiles after the British brought the industry and their trade links.

Are you saying that cities would not have been created if British would not have graced us by their exalted presence? You do know that sub-continent is home to the earliest well-developed civilizations when Europeans were still hunter-gatherers.
Also, Chandigarh in India and Islamabad in Pakistan are well-planned cities created after independence.

Coming to railways. There are many other nations who got railways and were not colonized by British or other nations eg. Japan. And if you have heard Shashi Tharoor's Oxford speech, you would know that British profited so much from the railways in India that one mile costed 3 times that of in Canada.

Regarding textiles, the British imposed a lot of tarriff on Indian industry to ensure that India was forced to supply raw cotton to Britain and import finished cloth from Britain's mills. It was much later that enterprising individuals such as Tata started homegrown textile manufacturing.

If you have so much nostalgia for Britain, why did your ancestors not go with them in 1947 ?

View attachment 778774
China exported spices worth a total of 928 million $ & imported 36 m $ worth.
This is 3 times more than India's spice export.

Anyone can create an excel sheet. Please give me some credible proof.

 

[Maula Jatt]

Somewhere I am thinking what exactly was the reason this region of Punjab/KP devoloped hatered for Delhi kingdoms/ Hindustan

Cause it seems eventhough KP was Muslim and Punjab was still non muslim, Hindus, they made up with each other to take revenge from Hindustanis?

Was it because this was a rebellious region and Hindustani empires to consolidate power always genocided this region whenever they saw a threat?

This was thier way of revenge/self preservation?

@Indus Pakistan ,@Talwar e Pakistan

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Somewhere I am thinking what exactly was the reason this region of Punjab/KP devoloped hatered for Delhi kingdoms/ Hindustan

Cause it seems eventhough KP was Muslim and Punjab was still non muslim, Hindus, they made up with each other to take revenge from Hindustanis?

Was it because this was a rebellious region and Hindustani empires to consolidate power always genocided this region whenever they saw a threat?

This was thier way of revenge/self preservation?

@Indus Pakistan ,@Talwar e Pakistan

My opinion is geography had significant impact. The region has it's own distinct geography [harsh, dry, dissected hilly land] which is contrasted with the fertile Ganga plains which always had high population density.

 

[Maira La]

Why do all Indians have a flabby belly?

Low testosterone.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Low testosterone.

High carb diet, low quality protien intake, lots of sugary food in conjunction with bad genes will lead to that pathetic belly bulge but skinny legs and arms.

 

[Maula Jatt]

@Indus Pakistan @SIPRA @Ace of Spades @Verve @Sine Nomine

WE need to understand that the Vedas... first/original... were written on the Banks of Indus!!!

You will find adulations and salutations of Vedic writers for the Mighty Indus...

Our Conflict with the good Gangetics is Ancient one... even in Vedas there is a lot to find about it...

Even in Ramayan there are passage of how Ram fired his arrow towards Pakistan ... hit Our Thur Desert... saying that the 'evil' people live there..that is why it became a desert... he wanted to punish the SeaGod or something... This before he crosses the sea bridge made by the MonkeyArmy...

The point is one can find numerous references about the differences and Hostilities between the Two Civilisations...

Brahminism met Aminimists and came out the present day Gangetic themes ...including Castisms... because the expanding ProtoPakistanis/Vedics didn't see the local population as equal...

Now when we come to last 1200yrs.... the Acceptance of Universal Humanism spread across OurRegion... which includes present day Afghanistan...which is only 200yrs old.. before that it was all a shifting sands between Paks and Persians... Duranis/Abdali ....

Now why didn't the good Gangetics established a impactful and lasting empire is a good question and requires detached and clinical enquiry.

We must take the persistent sicknesses and periodic diseases into consideration along with distribution of food among the different castes and of course, nature/quality of that food... hence, health, fitness, ferocity and stemina...

Furthermore, the military make and warfare techniques/strategies... each kingdom had its own particular style depending on resources and food-geography... therefore. we cann't say that the present lumbed together GangeticState is unified expression of the pre-Islamic Rule...

Sikhs are of course part of Ancient Paks... hence, their style of fighting and eating habbits are different from UP or Bihar or Bengal ...

Same goes for GangeticOccupied Thar...

The Reason the good Gangetics couldn't fight the Invaders was the reasons mentioned above... as many kingdoms/principalities found opportune to pay Tributes to the Invaders-EmpireBuilders than Kill them all.

The current (from 1850-to-date) Hindutva is trying to 'conquer' the land within the so-called India by lynching or killing Muslims of India...

Sher Shah Suri was a Great Administrator... but he built upon the already established Mughal empire... that too for short years...

We can. with comfort, say that Pakistan was a buffer and adversary of the kindgoms beyond IndusValleyPeople...

When Islam Unified the region once again.. the same Pakistan became gateway to the Conquest and EmpireBuilding by the 'Invaders' ... same as today Pakistan is OnceAgain is the Gateway for the CentralAsians and 'Turks'... Keeping India Out as Always...

Last 70 years have been a fluke in terms of the Span of History.. but this process is now in reverse...

APS needs to be redeemed with compound intrest.

We should try to avoid bringing genetics into discussion... because it always ends up in racism... which is vulgar.

Our ONLY Beef with the Gangetics is their Falsehood and Robbery of OurAncient Heritage...

They need to return the little DancingWoman statue along with all other Indus Artefacts... for the rest they can invent any history or myths they please... it is their good Gangtec right.

Avoid genetics from discussion and focus only on food, castism, customs and un-related /un-unified kingdoms of Gangetics... which is essentially a two Civilisation state within its on borders... South and North.

We must not forget that IndusPeople were trading with CentralAsia, Sumer, Persia and AncientEygpt...

Paks Defeated Alexander.. and made him run from Multan... his men dying of thirst along OurMakranCoast...

Know Thyself!

agree with the underlined

 

[halupridol]

The title of the thread is patently wrong.
Assamese are hindu and our ancestors defeated invaders everytime they attacked despite all odds.(including mughals)
The proper title should be,,, why bhayyas(people living between banks of indus and ganga) never managed to save thr izzatt from foreign invaders?

BTW if there was to be a competition for incompetence and straight out cowardice in the subcontinent,, arguably conterminous Pakistan wud win it.
I mean despite having mountains on 2 sides, sea on one, fertile land,,,, they cud never ever escape humiliation, subjugation by smaller invading forces, let alone ever having any indigenous empire.

 

[Tamerlane]

It’s an interesting discussion. For an answer we don’t need to go back thousands of years in history. Just look back 20 years. A foreign power wanted to invade the land (Afghanistan) and all of the politicians and generals in the Subcontinent we’re jumping for joy to help them, plus a big proportion of Afghans themselves. It’s not too hard to imagine that all invasions happened that way. There is so much division and hatred in South Asia that all invaders are welcomed with open arms by someone.

The second reason is that whoever lives in South Asia seems to develop the same docile nature. Once Muslims had conquered India the invasions did not stop. After a couple of generations the last Muslim invaders became Indianized and soft. Then a new group of fiercer non-Indian Muslim army would invade and ravage the land. Some would stay to rule, others would go back with the booty.

My namesake, Tamerlane, was an Uzbek Muslim from Samarkand. Around 1400 he invaded Muslim India and sacked and looted Delhi and took the plunder back. He killed both Muslims and Hindus with wild abandon and left a pyramid of human skulls.

Same thing with a whole list of other invaders. They whacked Indians of all religions. The problem seems to be in the soil.

 

[Leishangthem]

Are you saying that cities would not have been created if British would not have graced us by their exalted presence? You do know that sub-continent is home to the earliest well-developed civilizations when Europeans were still hunter-gatherers.
Also, Chandigarh in India and Islamabad in Pakistan are well-planned cities created after independence.

Coming to railways. There are many other nations who got railways and were not colonized by British or other nations eg. Japan. And if you have heard Shashi Tharoor's Oxford speech, you would know that British profited so much from the railways in India that one mile costed 3 times that of in Canada.

Regarding textiles, the British imposed a lot of tarriff on Indian industry to ensure that India was forced to supply raw cotton to Britain and import finished cloth from Britain's mills. It was much later that enterprising individuals such as Tata started homegrown textile manufacturing.

If you have so much nostalgia for Britain, why did your ancestors not go with them in 1947 ?


Anyone can create an excel sheet. Please give me some credible proof.

You type like some sort or delirious revisionist, for example , Kolkata was literally patched up from 3 villages Kalikata Gobindapur and Sutanuti,by the British, or say Bombay, it was a group of seven islets covered by samphires and palm coconuts, inhabited by native fisherfolk before the Europeans arrived. But it seems you will literally say anything ,how typical and expected.

Coming to railways. There are many other nations who got railways and were not colonized by the British or other nations eg. Japan. And if you have heard Shashi Tharoor's Oxford speech, you would know that British profited so much from the railways in India that one mile cost 3 times that of in Canada.

what is the point of this post even??

Japan was highly literate, first rate productive ,regimented united economy,as pristine as today's Japan,only replaced by more high rise building right now ,they bought railway lines from British,India got their's built by British,huge difference. Japanese are a complete different beast and and different society than the likes of India which is more akin to Africa overall,I'm not talking about some feudal empire with the leaders living an opulent life,I'm talking about real modern states.

Regarding textiles, the British imposed a lot of tarriff on Indian industry to ensure that India was forced to supply raw cotton to Britain and import finished cloth from Britain's mills. It was much later that enterprising individuals such as Tata started homegrown textile manufacturing.

Like India (not that there was something called India back then) was even in a state to compete,British had developed modern textile industry ,that decimated the rest of competition,even europe and US tried hard to steal British trade secrets. British saved India by scaling up textile production and incorporating it in the vast trade network and infrastructure chain of British empire, because unlike Japan,or China,overall India was literally a jungle divided in dozen of odd states .

Anyone can create an excel sheet. Please give me some credible proof.

https://trendeconomy.com/data/h2/China/0910

 

[Leishangthem]

The title of the thread is patently wrong.
Assamese are hindu and our ancestors defeated invaders everytime they attacked despite all odds.(including mughals)
The proper title should be,,, why bhayyas(people living between banks of indus and ganga) never managed to save thr izzatt from foreign invaders?

BTW if there was to be a competition for incompetence and straight out cowardice in the subcontinent,, arguably conterminous Pakistan wud win it.
I mean despite having mountains on 2 sides, sea on one, fertile land,,,, they cud never ever escape humiliation, subjugation by smaller invading forces, let alone ever having any indigenous empire.

The ruling class was Tai from east with Tai faith, before being consumed by the majority religion of the populace "Hinduism" . They weren't text book hindu.

 

[halupridol]

The ruling class was Tai from east with Tai faith, before being consumed by the majority religion of the populace "Hinduism" . They weren't text book hindu.

Lol here comes the fake manipuri, who can't speak a word in manipuri
Lol what is textbook Hindu?
Even now we r perhaps not "textbook" HinduHindu(Hindu bhayya)
Have u ever visited any place of worship in Assam?

 

[SIPRA]

Avoid genetics from discussion and focus only on food, castism, customs and un-related /un-unified kingdoms of Gangetics... which is essentially a two Civilisation state within its on borders... South and North.
Know Thyself!

Paa Jee

To me, the fundamental conflict, between India and Pakistan, is essentially Hindu-Muslim conflict, with its roots, lying in ideological differences, historical animosity and a peculiar Hindutvadi interpretation of medieval history. These were the basis, which were propounded by All India Muslim League, and our Quaid, while demanding for Pakistan. They were amply clear, by 1930s, that Indian National Congress, Mahasabha, and other Hindu political organizations, have an unambiguous intent of replacing "British Raj" with "Hindu Raj", by the sheer brutal force of their majority, where Muslims would be subjugated second-class citizens, with their rights being persistently usurped and trampled upon.

To transform, this great ideological struggle, based upon principle of Right of Self Determination, into some sort of Indus-Ganga conflict (with ancestral, genealogical and geographical undertones), in my view, is post de facto revision of independence history, to which I don't ascribe; though, I don't doubt the positive intent of its proponents.

Principal reason, for the attack of India on Kashmir (Muslim majority state), in October 1947, was an effort to destruct this ideological basis. When Quaid called Kashmir as "jugular vein" of Pakistan; it was more in a metaphysical and metaphorical sense; since he knew that this attack is the first stepping stone to undo ideological foundations of Pakistan, and towards attainment of "Akhand Bharat" dream.

Not to forget, that India is held together, against ethnic centrifugal forces, by the grip of ideological power of "Hinduism", whatever it is, and not by some so-called "Indianness".

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Paa Jee

To me, the fundamental conflict, between India and Pakistan, is essentially Hindu-Muslim conflict, with its roots, lying in ideological differences, historical animosity and a peculiar Hindutvadi interpretation of medieval history. These were the basis, which were propounded by All India Muslim League, and our Quaid, while demanding for Pakistan. They were amply clear, by 1930s, that Indian National Congress, Mahasabha, and other Hindu political organizations, have an unambiguous intent of replacing "British Raj" with "Hindu Raj", by the sheer brutal force of their majority, where Muslims would be subjugated second-class citizens, with their rights being persistently usurped and trampled upon.

To transform, this great ideological struggle, based upon principle of Right of Self Determination, into some sort of Indus-Ganga conflict (with ancestral, genealogical and geographical undertones), in my view, is post de facto revision of independence history, to which I don't ascribe; though, I don't doubt the positive intent of its proponents.

Principal reason, for the attack of India on Kashmir (Muslim majority state), in October 1947, was an effort to destruct this ideological basis. When Quaid called Kashmir as "jugular vein" of Pakistan; it was more in a metaphysical and metaphorical sense; since he knew that this attack is the first stepping stone to undo ideological foundations of Pakistan, and towards attainment of "Akhand Bharat" dream.

Not to forget, that India is held together, against ethnic centrifugal forces, by the grip of ideological power of "Hinduism", whatever it is, and not by some so-called "Indianness".

The differences between Pakistan and india are not just religious. It is racial and ethnic too. Also, the indian so called "Muslims" are just as anti-Pakistani" as are indian hindus and sikhs.

 

[SIPRA]

The differences between Pakistan and india are not just religious. It is racial and ethnic too.

These differences exist both within Pakistan as well as within India.

Also, the indian so called "Muslims" are just as anti-Pakistani" as are indian hindus and sikhs.

There are certain cogent reasons, for this attitude of Indian Muslims, in which, I wouldn't like to go. But this is an undeniable fact that Muslims, living in present day India, as much as supported the idea of Pakistan, as others, as is clearly reflected in the 1945-46 elections results, which in fact lead to the formation of Pakistan, as it is. I stand indebted to those Muslims of India.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

These differences exist both within Pakistan as well as within India.



There are certain cogent reasons, for this attitude of Indian Muslims, in which, I wouldn't like to go. But this is an undeniable fact that Muslims, living in present day India, as much as supported the idea of Pakistan, as others, as is clearly reflected in the 1945-46 elections results, which in fact lead to the formation of Pakistan, as it is. I stand indebted to those Muslims of India.

The racial, genetic and ethnic differences between Pakistanis and indians is FAR greater than that amongst Pakistanis. The indians are a completely different race and peoples to us.

indian so called "Muslims" now are just as much if not more anti-Pakistani than indian hindus and sikhs. Even those that have been the victims of sanghi oppression. They are just as much our enemies as other indians.