After Statue of Unity, India to get world’s tallest Shiva Murti

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

If the ones taht he killed or enslaved arent your ancestors,then the IVC people arent your ancestors either since their descendants they got killed or enslaved and replaced by your forefathers

People of IVC left their cities because of drought. If you know where they went, please let our historians and archaeologists know it.

I know how you Indians like slavery and rape, but try to keep it to a minimum when you write your book.

I was specifically referring to the example of Lahore that you gave. Obviously, most of our ancestry would still be from local converts who assisted the conquerors in their campaigns, but a small amount of it does come from foreign migrants to the region (as proven in several genetic studies). Since most of us identify as religious Muslims, obviously we'll care more about the history of Islam/Muslims in the region than IVC or whatever else took place before that.



3/5, and prior to that we (i.e Muslims) were hammering you for hundreds of years.



No, you're the one who's country lacks enough toilets.



Have you forgotten how many of your people earn a dollar a day (or less)?



It seems you're willingly ignoring my point. I'll post it again for you to understand:

"We are Muslims, so naturally our heroes would be (no surprise here) other Muslims. What's next? Are you going to say we can't be proud of our Prophets (peace be upon them all), or their companions (may Allah be pleased with them)? Countries, like we have today, weren't even a thing back then. In those times, there was only Darul Islam (Muslim land), Darul Harb (hostile land), and Darul Ahd (land which Muslims have a truce with). That's how we (practising Muslims) view history."

And as said before, Muslims from Pakistan and north India are descended from these conquerors, they have influenced our culture immensely, and in Islam we are all considered to be the children of Adam (peace be upon him), the first human who we also consider to have been Muslim. None of your points are relevant, and they display a profound lack of knowledge on your part about the subject at hand.

Also, just because you've never heard of such individuals, doesn't mean they don't exist. It just exposes your ignorance of history. Anyway, here's a list of some Muslim rulers/soldiers from what is now Pakistan that also belong to the same ethnic groups as many Pakistanis:

Muhammad Bin Qasim had Baloch and Indo-Aryans fight in his army.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_bin_Qasim#The_campaign

Ahmed Khan Karral was a Punjabi rebel from Sahiwal who fought against the British and Sikh empires.

https://www.dawn.com/news/793732

Babur had Pashtuns and north Punjabis fight in his army.

http://firdosh101.blogspot.com/2009/05/history-of-gakhars.html

http://www.barmazid.com/2016/05/baburs-relations-with-pashtun-tribes.html

As said before, Mahmud Ghaznavi had Indo-Aryans in his army.

http://www.barmazid.com/2016/11/ghaznavids-had-large-number-of-hindus.html

Shahbaz Khan was a Punjabi, and a general of the Mughal Empire during the reign of Akbar. He fought in many battles, expanding the domain of the Empire and crushing those who rebelled against it. He also introduced the dagh o mahali system into the Mughal military to curb corruption and boost efficiency.

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

https://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.php?StoryImage=02_10_2016_177_005

Jam Nizamuddin was a Sindhi Sultan who ruled over much of southern Pakistan and Gujarat.

https://www.dawn.com/news/688267

Sikander Butshikan was an Indo-Aryan (as displayed by the fact that his father claimed ancestry from the Pandavas) who's family originally came from Swat that ruled over Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir, and other surrounding territories. He completely crushed his enemies and earned the title of 'butshikan' which means 'idol breaker' for destroying many of their statues. He also kept cordial relations with Tamerlane.

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

http://lostkashmirihistory.com/sultan-sikandar-man-myth/

https://archive.org/stream/ainiakbarivolum00mubgoog/ainiakbarivolum00mubgoog_djvu.txt

Ali Sher Khan Anchan was a famous Balti king from Gilgit Baltistan who conquered parts of northern Pakistan and India. He also kept cordial relations with the Mughal emperor Akbar (who himself came from Umerkot, which is in Sindh).

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

Mir Chakar Rind was a Baloch Sultan who ruled over much of southern Pakistan, and at one point sent his army to sack Delhi. He also helped Humayun retake the throne from the Sur dynasty.

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

http://balochistansearch.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_18.html

https://real-politique.blogspot.com/2009/12/mir-chakar-khan-rind-warrior-hero-of.html

I can list more names if the above list doesn't suffice.



Yes, you did. I was perfectly amicable with you until, like most Indian nationalists on the internet, you had to start running your mouth like an idiot.



That's not my problem, take it up with him but don't direct your frustration at me. It makes you look silly.



Then stop trying to tell us otherwise.

Excellent post. We really should be discussing these generals and rulers in more detail to our coming generations.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

That's not my problem, take it up with him but don't direct your frustration at me. It makes you look silly.

I could answer the rest of that,but it'll just start the cycle again.So i'll just answer this key part.I answered reichsmarshall,not you .You then started quoting my post and now telling me that i was taking out my frustration on you.Who's the silly one?Scroll back and check who quoted whom first.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

I could answer the rest of that,but it'll just start the cycle again.

No, you can't. You've been proven wrong and are too arrogant to admit it, so like most Indian nationalists on here you'll just ignore most of what I say and continue to blabber the same nonsense despite being proven wrong. This is called sticking your head in the sand.

You then started quoting my post and now telling me that i was taking out my frustration on you.

Yes, because my reply was perfectly amicable. You were the one who decided to start throwing insults first.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

No, you can't. You've been proven wrong and are too arrogant to admit it, so like most Indian nationalists on here you'll just ignore most of what I say and continue to blabber the same nonsense despite being proven wrong. This is called sticking your head in the sand.



Yes, because my reply was perfectly amicable. You were the one who decided to start throwing insults first.

Proven wrong?Very well.
Who did qasim kill and sell in damascus markets?Sindhis
Who did mahmud ghazni conquer?Kingdoms of kabul,FATA and then western punjan.Rest he raided like mathura,somnath.Lahore was only his 'winter capital' because thats where he quartered his army for his annual summer raids.
Who did babur kill first and most brutally?FATA pathans.He boasts in his autobiography baburnama of making towers of skulls of these pasthun tribesmen enroute to his battle with lodi.Who did abdali loot most?Punjabis.

So you're example of ruling and hammering along with these men are -
1.Mhd bin qasim's indo- aryans?Whole north india are considered indo aryans too.Wtf does that mean.His main army and ruling elite were caliphate arabs,sure he might have had local mercenaries.Even marathas had thousands of muslim mercenaries -pindaris and gardis in later years,doesnt make them a 'muslim' empire.Arabs came and destroyed you 'pakistani' sindhis. When the arabs tried crossing the indus and enter 'gangadesh' as a prominent pak member calls it they were decisively routed by pratihars-chalukyas and never seen again.

2.Ahmed karral - a small time rebel who lost.This is your example of your local empire builder.Lol.I repeat where is your empire builder from sindh-west punjab who 'ruled' india?Forget it who ruled themselves.

3.Babur as i said crushed the pashtuns most brutally above all others.He ruled over kabul so its not surprising he had afghan mercenaries ,but his core army and generals were mostly turko-mongol,tajik and uzbek.Infact mughals and afghans hated each other and would over next 30 years fight several bloody battles.

4.Mahmud ghaznavi also had hindu soldiers in is army.Doesnt mean it was a 'hindu' empire.All of mahmud's elite were turkish ghulams.

5.Throughout the whole mughal empire you can point to only 1 5000 rank mansabdar who held any military post of significance?Just during akbar's rule his commander-in chief and main general -Man singh.The only mughal general that suceeded against shivaji one time - 7000 rank jai singh. Mansab rank 7000 -highest possible.And thats just one.Can list you a dozen rajput/maratha chiefs in the mughal period with 5000 or more mansab rank.25% of mughal nobility were rajputs.And with 1 muslim punjabi you 'ruled'.Lolz.
Mughal ruling elite had 4 factions - Turani(old mughal central asians like nizam),Irani(persians),Rajputs and rais and finally sheikhazads(subcontinent muslims).The only time sheikhazad faction ever enjoyed power in delhi was a brief period when sayyid brothers became puppetmaster wazirs.They did so with maratha military support.When maratha support was withdrawn they were destroyed by turani faction led by nizam and their followers massacred.
During sultanate era the only time hindustani muslim had any power was when firoz shah tughluq used to create his own slave army of them to counter turkish rivals.As usual they were crushed after his death.Balban,purged all non-turk muslims from army and even bureaucracy.He refused to even meet any non-turks in court.

6.Ah ..good.Jam nizamuddin.So in a thousand years you have finally found a 'empire'.Oh well even if its just a kingdom that existed for 20 years and ruled sindh,parts of baluchistan and punjab.Don't see how it ruled over 'india' though.Either way thumbs up.20 year glory.You know even sikh empire ruled pakistan longer than that...

7.Sher khan anchan.You call that an empire? More like a fringe petty kingdom that lasted briefly.Never ruled over 'hindus',just small sprasely populated fringe area of gilgit .

8.Yes,amongst you only the baloch can be said to have some history of independence.Didn't last but far better than pakistani punjabi-sindhi chronic surrender syndrome.Pity their current condition.Didn't ever rule over 'india' though.And yeah ,wasn't an empire either.

So still waiting for that 'empire' that ruled over idnia originating in pakistan.Keep at it.Reading history unclutters the mind.

And finally.If you don't want me to answer you,don't start the whole thing by quoting me.What is amicable to you may not be so to others.Your guy made an offhand comment and started the whole drama,i was responding to him.You entered the conversation for no reason,and now blaming me for it.If reichsmarshall had not begun it none of this would have happened.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Proven wrong?Very well.
Who did qasim kill and sell in damascus markets?Sindhis

And who also fought in his army? Sindhis.

Who did mahmud ghazni conquer?Kingdoms of kabul,FATA and then western punjan.Rest he raided like mathura,somnath.Lahore was only his 'winter capital' because thats where he quartered his army for his annual summer raids.

No, Lahore was extensively developed, the fact that you think otherwise shows yet again how little you know about what you're discussing. Also, as said before, these areas supplied troops for his army.

Who did babur kill first and most brutally?FATA pathans.He boasts in his autobiography baburnama of making towers of skulls of these pasthun tribesmen enroute to his battle with lodi.

But he still had Pashtuns and Punjabis fight in his army. His relationship with tribes from Afghanistan and Pakistan was more complex than "lol I hate you all".

Who did abdali loot most?Punjabis.

Still a Pashtun, and many Pakistanis are descended from him (e.g Asad Durrani). Also, almost no Pakistani Punjabis view the Sikh Empire as their own. Pakistani Punjabis like Mukarrab Khan and Ahmed Khan Karral fought against them to the bitter end.

So you're example of ruling and hammering along with these men are -
1.Mhd bin qasim's indo- aryans?Whole north india are considered indo aryans too.Wtf does that mean.His main army and ruling elite were caliphate arabs,sure he might have had local mercenaries.Even marathas had thousands of muslim mercenaries -pindaris and gardis in later years,doesnt make them a 'muslim' empire.Arabs came and destroyed you 'pakistani' sindhis. When the arabs tried crossing the indus and enter 'gangadesh' as a prominent pak member calls it they were decisively routed by pratihars-chalukyas and never seen again.

2.Ahmed karral - a small time rebel who lost.This is your example of your local empire builder.Lol.I repeat where is your empire builder from sindh-west punjab who 'ruled' india?Forget it who ruled themselves.

3.Babur as i said crushed the pashtuns most brutally above all others.He ruled over kabul so its not surprising he had afghan mercenaries ,but his core army and generals were mostly turko-mongol,tajik and uzbek.Infact mughals and afghans hated each other and would over next 30 years fight several bloody battles.

4.Mahmud ghaznavi also had hindu soldiers in is army.Doesnt mean it was a 'hindu' empire.All of mahmud's elite were turkish ghulams.

5.Throughout the whole mughal empire you can point to only 1 5000 rank mansabdar who held any military post of significance?Just during akbar's rule his commander-in chief and main general -Man singh.The only mughal general that suceeded against shivaji one time - 7000 rank jai singh. Mansab rank 7000 -highest possible.And thats just one.Can list you a dozen rajput/maratha chiefs in the mughal period with 5000 or more mansab rank.25% of mughal nobility were rajputs.And with 1 muslim punjabi you 'ruled'.Lolz.
Mughal ruling elite had 4 factions - Turani(old mughal central asians like nizam),Irani(persians),Rajputs and rais and finally sheikhazads(subcontinent muslims).The only time sheikhazad faction ever enjoyed power in delhi was a brief period when sayyid brothers became puppetmaster wazirs.They did so with maratha military support.When maratha support was withdrawn they were destroyed by turani faction led by nizam and their followers massacred.
During sultanate era the only time hindustani muslim had any power was when firoz shah tughluq used to create his own slave army of them to counter turkish rivals.As usual they were crushed after his death.Balban,purged all non-turk muslims from army and even bureaucracy.He refused to even meet any non-turks in court.

6.Ah ..good.Jam nizamuddin.So in a thousand years you have finally found a 'empire'.Oh well even if its just a kingdom that existed for 20 years and ruled sindh,parts of baluchistan and punjab.Don't see how it ruled over 'india' though.Either way thumbs up.20 year glory.You know even sikh empire ruled pakistan longer than that...

7.Sher khan anchan.You call that an empire? More like a fringe petty kingdom that lasted briefly.Never ruled over 'hindus',just small sprasely populated fringe area of gilgit .

8.Yes,amongst you only the baloch can be said to have some history of independence.Didn't last but far better than pakistani punjabi-sindhi chronic surrender syndrome.Pity their current condition.Didn't ever rule over 'india' though.And yeah ,wasn't an empire either.

1. You admit he had local soldiers. Good to know. That alone is enough to invalidate your claim of Muslims from Pakistan and India having no reason to admire Muhammad Bin Qasim, when our ancestors fought in his army. Also, he was a soldier from the Ummayad Caliphate, the literal representative of Muslims at the time. Oh and they did launch raids into India, but that was not under Muhammad Bin Qasim's leadership.

2. I wasn't listing empire builders, I was listing Muslim military figures from the region. Ahmed Khan Karral was not a failure by any stretch of the means, he rebelled against the Sikh Empire and managed to outlive it, it was the British Empire that killed him and even then he died nobly.

3. Already discussed earlier.

4. I know the Ghaznavids weren't a Hindu empire, they were a Muslim one. Hence why we love them.

5. I already told you, if one isn't enough I can name more, e.g Adina Beg, Muhammad Saleh or Fateh Muhammad (all Punjabi). I'd also like to see evidence of Tughlaq rulers removing all locals from their army and administration, that seems highly unlikely considering how they intermarried with such people.

6. Alreadu explained in the response to point number 2.

7. He ruled over a pretty significant amount of territory and made Indians bleed, so yes, it counts.

8. Lol you're still barking on about "chronic surrender syndrome" even when your Islamophobic propoganda has been refuted. No matter how much you squeal, the fact will remain the same, which is that Muslims from Central Asia, the Middle East as well as South Asia (and even some Africans) crushed India and ruled over it for hundreds of years, nothing you do can change that. Also, as said before, Mir Chakar Rind sent some of his army to sack Delhi, so he counts.

It's interesting to see you still ignored my point about Adam (peace be upon him), the fact that we identify as Muslim before anything else, and the fact that many Muslims from Pakistan and north India have ancestry from these foreign invaders. But considering your awful response towards everything else I wrote, I think it's better if you save yourself the embarrassment and just stop blabbering.

And finally.If you don't want me to answer you,don't start the whole thing by quoting me.What is amicable to you may not be so to others.Your guy made an offhand comment and started the whole drama,i was responding to him.You entered the conversation for no reason,and now blaming me for it.If reichsmarshall had not begun it none of this would have happened.

I don't care about what someone else did, the fact that you feel it justifies your behaviour towards me speaks volumes about what kind of an individual I'm dealing with. Get it straight, I'm not @Reichsmarschall and he's not me. Don't like what he said? Lash out at him, but if you're unable to do so for whatever reason (be it inability or cowardice), then just keep your mouth closed. Simple.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

And who also fought in his army? Sindhis.




No, Lahore was extensively developed, the fact that you think otherwise shows yet again how little you know about what you're discussing. Also, as said before, these areas supplied troops for his army.



But he still had Pashtuns and Punjabis fight in his army. His relationship with tribes from Afghanistan and Pakistan was more complex than "lol I hate you all".



Still a Pashtun, and many Pakistanis are descended from him (e.g Asad Durrani). Also, almost no Pakistani Punjabis view the Sikh Empire as their own. Pakistani Punjabis like Mukarrab Khan and Ahmed Khan Karral fought against them to the bitter end.



1. You admit he had local soldiers. Good to know. That alone is enough to invalidate your claim of Muslims from Pakistan and India having no reason to admire Muhammad Bin Qasim, when our ancestors fought in his army. Also, he was a soldier from the Ummayad Caliphate, the literal representative of Muslims at the time. Oh and they did launch raids into India, but that was not under Muhammad Bin Qasim's leadership.

2. I wasn't listing empire builders, I was listing Muslim military figures from the region. Ahmed Khan Karral was not a failure by any stretch of the means, he rebelled against the Sikh Empire and managed to outlive it, it was the British Empire that killed him and even then he died nobly.

3. Already discussed earlier.

4. I know the Ghaznavids weren't a Hindu empire, they were a Muslim one. Hence why we love them.

5. I already told you, if one isn't enough I can name more, e.g Adina Beg, Muhammad Saleh or Fateh Muhammad (all Punjabi). I'd also like to see evidence of Tughlaq rulers removing all locals from their army and administration, that seems highly unlikely considering how they intermarried with such people.

6. Alreadu explained in the response to point number 2.

7. He ruled over a pretty significant amount of territory and made Indians bleed, so yes, it counts.

8. Lol you're still barking on about "chronic surrender syndrome" even when your Islamophobic propoganda has been refuted. No matter how much you squeal, the fact will remain the same, which is that Muslims from Central Asia, the Middle East as well as South Asia (and even some Africans) crushed India and ruled over it for hundreds of years, nothing you do can change that. Also, as said before, Mir Chakar Rind sent some of his army to sack Delhi, so he counts.

It's interesting to see you still ignored my point about Adam (peace be upon him), the fact that we identify as Muslim before anything else, and the fact that many Muslims from Pakistan and north India have ancestry from these foreign invaders. But considering your awful response towards everything else I wrote, I think it's better if you save yourself the embarrassment and just stop blabbering.



I don't care about what someone else did, the fact that you feel it justifies your behaviour towards me speaks volumes about what kind of an individual I'm dealing with. Get it straight, I'm not @Reichsmarschall and he's not me. Don't like what he said? Lash out at him, but if you're unable to do so for whatever reason (be it inability or cowardice), then just keep your mouth closed. Simple.

I haven't said at all that muslims have no reason to admire qasim or ghazni.What i've consistently said is this -
muslims from todays pakistan area never 'ruled' india.And 2nd point qasim,abdali,babur and ghazni did heavy damage to the ones in current pak region -even though for you it may not count as they were hindus/buddhists back then.

If you are not listing empire builders then you are not answering me at all.Small and mid level military officials and bureacrats dont interest me,they are cogs in the wheel.Only the ruling elite matter in autocracies.Neither the mughal nor delhi sultanate had 'pakistani' origin elite of any significance.They were all afghans who current pakistanis hate,turks,tajiks,uzbeks,kazakhs,mongols and rajputs.
As for muslims ruling india,yes.They were dominant political power in subcontienent for roughly 500 years from 1200-1700 before the marathas and sikhs rose to power.Though they did rule pakistan for over a 1000 years from time of qasim and ghazni.Result is - the central asian hordes that came their homelands are now irrelevant wastelands ,or war stricken ruins.We are here and stronger and more prosperous than ever.As soon as they lost cavalry advantage they became from terrors of the world to little scared sheep and will never rise again.They are now objects of pity more than anything else.That is the cycle of life and the final lesson of history.What succeeded in pakistan area,in persia,in egypt where the ancient civilization and culture was destroyed didn't succeed here despite a 1000 years of effort.India's ancient culture and civilization despite distortions has survived those barbarians as well as the british looters and will continue to both survive and flourish.So better stop dreaming about ghaznis in the modern times as your friend was doing on a thread about an indian statue,and focus on your own country.You can worship him if you like,from us he gets nothing but contempt,expect nothing else and time has taken its due revenge on his people.

I didn't understand your point about adam at all or how this is relevant.So you can admire who you like,so what?

And finally i answered reichsmarshall and it would have been between us ,its not my problem you then start quoting me and when i answer feel offended.If you don't understand this simple chronology its you who needs a check.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

What i've consistently said is this -
muslims from todays pakistan area never 'ruled' india.

Still incorrect, Akbar and Shah Jahan were both born in what is now Pakistan, there's also the Shah Mir dynasty as well as the Maqpon dynasty (both of which I previously mentioned), and I guess the Samma and Soomra dynasties somewhat count since they ruled over Gujarat (but they weren't exactly aggressive towards Indians like the others were AFAIK). The Rind dynasty also somewhat counts since (as mentioned earlier) they sacked Delhi but they never actually ruled over it. There's also the Lodi dynasty, they were Pashtuns who had settled in Pakistani Punjab (and even intermarried with Punjabis) and ruled over a large portion of India:

Even Tipu Sultan's family originally came from the Punjab.

And again, as said before, there were people from what is now Pakistan who held prominent positions in these Muslim empires.

They were all afghans who current pakistanis hate

Back then there was no Durrand line. KPK, FATA and Balochistan were considered part of Afghanistan and the term 'Afghan' was historically used an ethnonym for Pashtuns.

Also, most Pakistanis really don't have a problem with most Afghans, and vice versa. Don't let the internet fool you.

rajputs

You do realise that they are a pretty big group in Pakistan, right?

focus on your own country.

Agreed, but I do feel that criticism of India's idea to build this statue while many of its people starve is warranted (likewise, if Pakistan spent billions on a Masjid that would also be unreasonable since many of us starve too).

So you can admire who you like,so what?

I only brought it up because you described it in a similar vein to Stockholm syndrome, which simply isn't the case.

,its not my problem you then start quoting me and when i answer feel offended.

I expected you to be more polite since I had said nothing (AFAIK) to offend you in my first post. If that's not how you work, fine.

 

[Type59]

UAE builds tall skyscrapers. India tall statues.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Still incorrect, Akbar and Shah Jahan were both born in what is now Pakistan, there's also the Shah Mir dynasty as well as the Maqpon dynasty (both of which I previously mentioned), and I guess the Samma and Soomra dynasties somewhat count since they ruled over Gujarat (but they weren't exactly aggressive towards Indians like the others were AFAIK). The Rind dynasty also somewhat counts since (as mentioned earlier) they sacked Delhi but they never actually ruled over it. There's also the Lodi dynasty, they were Pashtuns who had settled in Pakistani Punjab (and even intermarried with Punjabis) and ruled over a large portion of India:

Even Tipu Sultan's family originally came from the Punjab.

And again, as said before, there were people from what is now Pakistan who held prominent positions in these Muslim empires.



Back then there was no Durrand line. KPK, FATA and Balochistan were considered part of Afghanistan and the term 'Afghan' was historically used an ethnonym for Pashtuns.

Also, most Pakistanis really don't have a problem with most Afghans, and vice versa. Don't let the internet fool you.



You do realise that they are a pretty big group in Pakistan, right?



Agreed, but I do feel that criticism of India's idea to build this statue while many of its people starve is warranted (likewise, if Pakistan spent billions on a Masjid that would also be unreasonable since many of us starve too).



I only brought it up because you described it in a similar vein to Stockholm syndrome, which simply isn't the case.



I expected you to be more polite since I had said nothing (AFAIK) to offend you in my first post. If that's not how you work, fine.

Born?By that measure most delhi sultans and later mughals were 'born' in India.
Akbar was indianized(by choice) turko mongol timurid.Shahjahan was half-timurid half rajasthani kachwa rajput by blood.

This guy look pakistani to you?The only pakistanis who will come anywhere near to this guy are the hazaras who are being slowly killed off by your radical extremists.

Statue of babur in uzbekistan.His grave is in Kabul.Where is pakistan in this.


But whatever i dont have any right to tell you who to admire and shouldnt either.But your members shouldnt bring up ghazni and make snide comments randomly either.You guys can admire him,we dont.I agree that expenses on the statues are probably unwarranted,but its not coming from national treasury.The state govt's are doing it,so its their decision.

As for your first post,i quoted reichs guy on a comment 'all it would take is another ghazni to bring it down'he made out of the blue implying that there still exists amongst you the sentiment of trying to attack and destroy india's culture and civilization.You intervened from nowhere started quoting me.Now for you it may be polite,but for us ghazni is not a 'polite' subject .Until your first post i had nowhere brought up pakistan,my answer was dealing with ghazni and the central asians.You then asserted that his legacy lives on in modern day pakistanis and they are heirs and so on and so on.So you made it clear you guy still harbour hope of committing such atrocities given the chance.Then i showed what was your status to these central asian invaders and how you ancient pakistanis 'ruled' india.From there our argument has spiraled.It may be a result of mutual misunderstanding or maybe not.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Born?By that measure most delhi sultans and later mughals were 'born' in India.

Mahmud Ghaznavi has no attachment to Afghanistan other than being born there. If that's enough for you to consider him Afghan, then Shah Jahan and Akbar should also be considered Pakistani in your mind, unless you're just a blatant hypocrite. Not to mention they also ate the same food as us, spoke Urdu, and wore similar clothing.

This guy look pakistani to you?

The Mughals after Humayun didn't look like that, they assimilated into the Indo-Persian culture that prevailed among Muslims at the time (and still does, but the Persian aspect of it has been reduced as more time has passed).

Also, if we're going by looks, why is Turkic Ghaznavi considered Afghan when most of them don't look like him? Better yet, why does your country glorify the Aryan Hindus when they would have been white?

Phenotype doesn't matter much, people tend to assimilate rather quickly.

Statue of babur in uzbekistan.His grave is in Kabul.

And Muhammad Ghauri's grave is in Pakistan, as is Qutub Uddin's and many others. But you'll gloss over that when it suits you. Like I said before, this is hypocrisy.

Where is pakistan in this.

Already explained.

But whatever i dont have any right to tell you who to admire and shouldnt either.But your members shouldnt bring up ghazni and make snide comments randomly either.You guys can admire him,we dont.

Agreed.

ou then asserted that his legacy lives on in modern day pakistanis and they are heirs and so on and so on.So you made it clear you guy still harbour hope of committing such atrocities given the chance.

No, you're jumping the gun. Just because I said his legacy lives on in Pakistan doesn't mean we want to kill/enslave every Indian we can find. Mongols admire Ghenghis Khan. Does that mean they want to depopulate Iran? What about Iranians? They like Darius, so by your logic that means they want to invade Greece. Or what about the fact that Indians like Shivaji? Does that mean you want to attack the Pashtuns again? Of course not.

Then i showed

No, you lied.

 

[Dash]

I am sorry but this I dont get...Why would people come to see a "modern" statue?

I thought some Hindus claim they dont pray to the statue but use it as a means....so why need massive statues? What purpose do they serve? -An honest question....And why must it have records like worlds tallest?

I am not going to compare what big statues and clones the Chinese have made just for the sake of it and I am sure you will find a logic behind that. Be that as it may.

Hindus do pray to statues and the reason being you need a focal point for concentration and somebody to unite with.

For the second question. Whats the problem if burzh khalifa and palm island can be seen from space then why not this one? Get it?

 

[Dubious]

I am not going to compare what big statues and clones the Chinese have made just for the sake of it and I am sure you will find a logic behind that. Be that as it may.

So my initial guess was right...It is a competition of some sort?

Hindus do pray to statues and the reason being you need a focal point for concentration and somebody to unite with.

You actually dont....Muslims have crossed that level

For the second question. Whats the problem if burzh khalifa and palm island can be seen from space then why not this one? Get it?

And we are back to desperate competition?!

 

[prashantazazel]

People from developing countries tend to be religious. Grand statues are required to fool these masses, to keep them satisfied while the politicians and elites enjoy their irreligious, progressive lives.

This kind of money would be better spent developing civic infrastructure. But hey, as long as people get to pray, they don't mind living in squalor.