Why was there never an Islamic invasion of Nepal?

[Jaanbaz]

That thinking is error filled.

There was no oil in Arabia in those times - why would the Barbarians invade desolate places like the deserts?

No Invaders has ventured deep in Arabian desert mate. Mongols only invaded the large and rich cities like Baghdad. Most sensible invaders wouldn't waste their men and wealth on regions that carry no economic or strategic benefit to them.

 

[KingMamba]

That thinking is error filled.

There was no oil in Arabia in those times - why would the Barbarians invade desolate places like the deserts?

Depends on who you mean by barbarians?

No Invaders has ventured deep in Arabian desert mate. Mongols only invaded the large and rich cities like Baghdad. Most sensible invaders wouldn't waste their men and wealth on regions that carry no economic or strategic benefit to them.

Exactly the peninsula was left alone because all assumed it was just a vast desert, if invaders had use for oil back in the day they would have tried to take it.

 

[GorkhaPride]

Their cowardly arse would have been handed back. That is why.

I'd like to think so.

 

[KingMamba]

My friend, you are quoting a source which supports my view about difficulty in establishing religious views of Cyrus with any certainty, and then you make a very categorical statement. Are you not contradicting yourself? Do understand that I qualified my opinion with an IF, because I could not be certain.

In any case it is not an important issue. What does it matter any way? Let us leave it.

He is a troll if you bang him on the head with the same answer a thousand times he still won't get it.

Their cowardly arse would have been handed back. That is why.

LOL India was known for its riches and its largely flat plains meaning it served more realistic purposes for invaders.

 

[Pakistanisage]

Two Reasons.

1. There was no wealth in Nepal.

2. Who wants to climb those high Moutains ?

 

[GorkhaPride]

LOL India was known for its riches and its largely flat plains meaning it served more realistic purposes for invaders.

Mate, looking at your posts, you have a good knowledge of history. Do you think that various Muslim empires would have been able to conquer Nepal?

 

[KingMamba]

So who is the barbarian group that is supposed to be Yajuj Majuj in Cyrus version ?
In my theory they are Mongol since Alexandre visited India that has border land with the Mongol behind The Himalayan.

Mongol and Ancient Germany tribe : This is the only destroyer tribal...even Hitler still do it in recent time. George Bush jr is the other one.

Not the right website for this conversation my friend but I will just say they have not come yet.

Mate, looking at your posts, you have a good knowledge of history. Do you think that various Muslim empires would have been able to conquer Nepal?

No read austerlitz post he summed it up, most of the Muslim armies that could have invaded Nepal relied on horses and not infantry so they would have to give themselves a disadvantage just to try to invade but would have been cut down by the Gurkhas. Even the hill regions in Nepal are high altitude compared to plains in Punjab or North India.

 

[waz]

Nepal was peaceful.
Nepal was tough to conquer (terrain and excellent infantry).
Had no material riches.

 

[GorkhaPride]

[quote="KingMamba, post: 5339580, member: 139641"

No read austerlitz post he summed it up, most of the Muslim armies that could have invaded Nepal relied on horses and not infantry so they would have to give themselves a disadvantage just to try to invade but would have been cut down by the Gurkhas. Even the hill regions in Nepal are high altitude compared to plains in Punjab or North India.[/quote]
I think the Nepalese forces could have possibly have been overwhelmed by shear numbers however.

 

[waz]

Having met so many Nepalese people they are truly such a lovely and kind folk. Very hospitable, talkative and helpful.

 

[Indos]

Not the right website for this conversation my friend but I will just say they have not come yet.

I respect your opinion...but do you know that there is a new discovery that found a Greek Temple who worship only One God who is The Zeus Only (of course A God can be differ in name in every civilization)

 

[KingMamba]

I respect your opinion...but do you know that there is a new discovery that found a Greek Temple who worship only One God who is The Zeus Only (of course A God can be differ in name in every civilization)

Doesn't matter even Alexander's empire doesn't fit the description of the empire in the Quran but Cyrus' empire does, also if you read up on the background of those verses you will learn that they were revealed when the Jews ask Prophet Muhammad PBUH about a king they knew of which they figured if he was really a prophet he would be able to recount the story which is why those verses were sent down. The only gentile King the Jews speak of is Cyrus, also in the Quran the King is described as benevolent and Cyrus is known for the Cyrus Cylinder which is like the first document on human rights whereas Alexander put cities to the sword for resisting him.

[quote="KingMamba, post: 5339580, member: 139641"

No read austerlitz post he summed it up, most of the Muslim armies that could have invaded Nepal relied on horses and not infantry so they would have to give themselves a disadvantage just to try to invade but would have been cut down by the Gurkhas. Even the hill regions in Nepal are high altitude compared to plains in Punjab or North India.

Does Nepal have the riches India was known for in ancient times? Muslims didn't invade for the sake of it they usually invaded because the rulers wanted the spoils. As the British conquest of South Asia shows numerical advantage is offset if your infantry is worthless.

 

[GorkhaPride]

Does Nepal have the riches India was known for in ancient times? Muslims didn't invade for the sake of it they usually invaded because the rulers wanted the spoils. As the British conquest of South Asia shows numerical advantage is offset if your infantry is worthless.

No, not even close to India for obvious reasons however we weren't poor.
I thought Muslim empires invaded to spread Islam and that loot was a secondary objective. Or is it the other way round?

 

[KingMamba]

No, not even close to India for obvious reasons however we weren't poor.
I thought Muslim empires invaded to spread Islam and that loot was a secondary objective. Or is it the other way round?

Spreading Islam was secondary for the loot, Ghazni invaded 10 times or so just to loot temples which were known for their gold.

 

[LURKER]

Strategically not important and militarily hard to conquer due to terrain. Same is the case with North-eastern states of India- Nagaland,Manipur and Mizoram. Mughals could never taste success in Assam inspite of trying repeatedly due to tough terrain.