What's new

Can India become a superpower? An Analysis of India

Status
Not open for further replies.
They are all Indian and based in India, that's what matters. British India like South Africa, parts of North America, Australia, etc. was controlled from out those regions.

They are not India as the concept of India back then was a culture, not country or kingdom with a central government. There were Sikh states, Mysore kingdom, Maratha empire, etc that make up India. British India should revert into these entities to completely reverse the British colonialization of India. As of now, India is still a semi British colony.
 
.
They are not India as the concept of India back then was a culture, not country or kingdom with a central government. There were Sikh states, Mysore kingdom, Maratha empire, etc that make up India. British India should revert into these entities to completely reverse the British colonialization of India. As of now, India is still a semi British colony.

Yes, and when the land mass was mostly united and it went through some of it's best times in history. Because the usual none stop fighting between kingdoms like Sikh kingdom, Mysore, Marathas, Nizams, etc was at an end.

India is a semi British colony? Yeah, right.. Good try.
 
.
Yes, and when the land mass was mostly united and it went through some of it's best times in history. Because the usual none stop fighting between kingdoms like Sikh kingdom, Mysore, Marathas, Nizams, etc was at an end.

India is a semi British colony? Yeah, right.. Good try.

Its the British that united India. And its through the English language and India remains united. The majority of India was split into small kingdoms in most of its history. The Ashoka's empire lasted for only 150 years over 2 thousand years ago. And he created that empire for himself, not an entity called India. You can maybe argue that the Mughal emperor call himself the emperor of India, a title that was inherited by the British. But were there any more leaders that claimed the title "emperor of India" or "king of India" prior to the Mughals?
 
.
Its the British that united India. And its through the English language and India remains united. The majority of India was split into small kingdoms in most of its history. The Ashoka's empire lasted for only 150 years over 2 thousand years ago. And he created that empire for himself, not an entity called India. You can maybe argue that the Mughal emperor call himself the emperor of India, a title that was inherited by the British. But were there any more leaders that claimed the title "emperor of India" or "king of India" prior to the Mughals?

Mughals wouldnt have called the land mass India. They would have called in Hindustan..

And it's not due to the English language alone India remains united. It is due to Indians themselves wanting to be apart of India that India remains united to this day. Language wont help if the people dont want to be together like the Koreas and like your country and PRC.

And he created that empire for himself, not an entity called India.

Yes, that's how it worked back then But like I said, when that land mass was mostly united it went through it's peak years.
 
.
Mughals wouldnt have called the land mass India. They would have called in Hindustan..

And it's not due to the English language alone India remains united. It is due to Indians themselves wanting to be apart of India that India remains united to this day. Language wont help if the people dont want to be together like the Koreas and like your country and PRC.



Yes, that's how it worked back then But like I said, when that land mass was mostly united it went through it's peak years.

So your none answer is the correct answer that there were no central government of India before the Mughal brought some sort of unified government call "Hindustan" And than the British really united India. Thanks for confirming that British created the nation of India.

As for the Hindustan land mass, prior to the Mughal empire, it was united less than 200 years out of several thousand years of Indian civilization. As I stated before, India is a civilization and an impressive one. But civilization does not equate to country, nation, kingdom or empire. In effect, India was not a political entity but a cultural entity. Today's India was created by the British.
 
.
So your none answer is the correct answer that there were no central government of India before the Mughal brought some sort of unified government call "Hindustan" And than the British really united India. Thanks for confirming that British created the nation of India.

As for the Hindustan land mass, prior to the Mughal empire, it was united less than 200 years out of several thousand years of Indian civilization. As I stated before, India is a civilization and an impressive one. But civilization does not equate to country, nation, kingdom or empire. In effect, India was not a political entity but a cultural entity. Today's India was created by the British.

nation state is a modern concept. Do you know, your last Manchu king of Qing Dynasty Puyi created Manchu homeland Manchukuo with the help of Japanese, the plan was spoiled by Allies forces who united China as one nation.
 
.
So your none answer is the correct answer that there were no central government of India before the Mughal brought some sort of unified government call "Hindustan" And than the British really united India. Thanks for confirming that British created the nation of India.

As for the Hindustan land mass, prior to the Mughal empire, it was united less than 200 years out of several thousand years of Indian civilization. As I stated before, India is a civilization and an impressive one. But civilization does not equate to country, nation, kingdom or empire. In effect, India was not a political entity but a cultural entity. Today's India was created by the British.


And the CCP created the modern state of PRC.
 
.
nation state is a modern concept. Do you know, your last Manchu king of Qing Dynasty Puyi created Manchu homeland Manchukuo with the help of Japanese, the plan was spoiled by Allies forces who united China as one nation.

China was split into warlords after 1916. Prior to that, China was united. China was united most of time since 200BC. So it had succession of dynasties. Just like the ancient Egyptian kingdom.

So nation state might be a modern European concept. But a strong central government have been around since antiqueties. And in China, since before 200BC for most of its history.
 
.
China was split into warlords after 1916. Prior to that, China was united. China was united most of time since 200BC. So it had succession of dynasties. Just like the ancient Egyptian kingdom.

So nation state might be a modern European concept. But a strong central government have been around since antiqueties. And in China, since before 200BC for most of its history.

China was unified only within Great Wall of China otherwise historical China was the fraction of modern China. Even before Communist takeover, Tibet and Xinjiang were defacto independent states. I already showed you some maps, China within Great Wall was never always unified.

You guys even claim a unified China based on Mongol Empire. :lol: While Qing Dynasty never considered themselves Chinese and Puyi when found opportunity created a Manchu homeland.

The reality is Western countries shaped and unified modern China when they help you to freed it from the Japanese.
 
.
China was unified only within Great Wall of China otherwise historical China was the fraction of modern China. Even before Communist takeover, Tibet and Xinjiang were defacto independent states. I already showed you some maps, China within Great Wall was never always unified.

You guys even claim a unified China based on Mongol Empire. :lol: While Qing Dynasty never considered themselves Chinese and Puyi when found opportunity created a Manchu homeland.

The reality is Western countries shaped and unified modern China when they help you to freed it from the Japanese.

At one time, China was restricted within the great wall. At certain dynasties, such as han, tang, yuan, ming and Qing, China's territories include areas outside of the great wall. So your "historical" china being inside of great wall is not correct. As through out its history, China's military venture outside of today's China. For example, China rule Korea during Han dynasty. Chinese troops was defeated at battle of Talas by the Abbasid dynasty at today's Kazahstan to prevent China from over run central Asia. But China's western border at the time of Tang extend beyond today's Xinjiang province into today's central Asian republics.

On the other hand, India was in general not a unified kingdom or empire through out most of its history until Mughal unified a big portion of India before the British take over.
 
.
At one time, China was restricted within the great wall. At certain dynasties, such as han, tang, yuan, ming and Qing, China's territories include areas outside of the great wall. So your "historical" china being inside of great wall is not correct. As through out its history, China's military venture outside of today's China. For example, China rule Korea during Han dynasty. Chinese troops was defeated at battle of Talas by the Abbasid dynasty at today's Kazahstan to prevent China from over run central Asia. But China's western border at the time of Tang extend beyond today's Xinjiang province into today's central Asian republics.

On the other hand, India was in general not a unified kingdom or empire through out most of its history until Mughal unified a big portion of India before the British take over.

So you are indirectly claiming now that CAR is also part of China...when is the next foot patrol you people are going to send to CAR to claim it...

Also your claim that the Mughal empire united India is incorrect....there were various empires in India since ancient times who had direct or indirect control on the majority of India....(ever heard of the Mauryan empire) and some even extended to South east Asia...we never claim these parts or countries on some pretext that it was ruled from India....some even had tributaries in present day China...we never claim parts of China or China as a whole as part of India as some Indian emperor had ruled over these lands...what is history is history...what is in the present should be regarded as the new truth....
 
.
At one time, China was restricted within the great wall. At certain dynasties, such as han, tang, yuan, ming and Qing, China's territories include areas outside of the great wall. So your "historical" china being inside of great wall is not correct. As through out its history, China's military venture outside of today's China. For example, China rule Korea during Han dynasty. Chinese troops was defeated at battle of Talas by the Abbasid dynasty at today's Kazahstan to prevent China from over run central Asia. But China's western border at the time of Tang extend beyond today's Xinjiang province into today's central Asian republics.

On the other hand, India was in general not a unified kingdom or empire through out most of its history until Mughal unified a big portion of India before the British take over.

Tang Dynasty contained only 50% of modern day Chinese territory. So, whole Chinese landmass was never unified as single entity except for Yuan and Qing dynasties both of them non-Han dynasties.

Tang Dyansty
250px-Tang_Dynasty_circa_700_CE.png



In India, the boundaries of historical India almost remained the same (Land between the Mountains of the North and Seas of the South) but in case of China historically there was no fixed boundary of historical China and it was always the fraction of the boundary of modern China.

Even during Republican period of 1912-1949 Xinjiang and Tibet declared themselves independent. While the Western Allied Powers helped China to reclaim the Japanese Occupied China and Manchukuo to keep China as one piece nation.

634px-Manchukuo_map_1939.svg.png
 
.
Facebook pages? :hitwall: chinese IQ my @ss



so a 5 second clip from one movie from a country that makes a 1000 movies a year shows the mentality of indians?
:hitwall: chinese IQ at it again



faithfulguy gives me the impression that all chinese are heading to retardation. he cant even think straight.

Kid,don't talk IQ with us, it will make you have no where to hide.

Such threads opened by Pakistanis shows their obsession about India and hatred of its progress/successes. They and their underwear brother Chinese trolls (in various shapes and forms from Canada/Taiwan etc) talk about India becoming superpower more than some Indians do. Fact is, India is not even desiring to be one. India is poor and trying to do things in a positive way and by working hard. We are not the ones begging anyone for money and taking money from extremist sources and forcing our society to become more and more extremist day by day. India had lots of problem, some are taken care of and for some work is in progress. With in a decade we expect India to have solved the problems pertaining to poverty and food security. That is what our real success will be. God knows what some kind of tag is going to help in any way.

We don't care this topic, we know the answer. But, most if china can be superpower or if china can overtake us threads are started and trolled by you Indian guys.
 
. .
They are not India as the concept of India back then was a culture, not country or kingdom with a central government. There were Sikh states, Mysore kingdom, Maratha empire, etc that make up India. British India should revert into these entities to completely reverse the British colonialization of India. As of now, India is still a semi British colony.

for most of its history , China was not a united country either. India kicked out all the remaining colonies after independence. While China still leased out Hongkong and Macau to colonial powers. Taiwan on the other hand is a whole another story. It is literally an American outpost.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom