First World War - Finding Pakistan's place in history.

[VCheng]

Havildar Mohmmad Khan, Distt Chakwal, Punjab.

Why are you so prejudiced against us?

And the rank and unit is part of the British Army that the respected Havaldar served, right?

 

[Kompromat]

Would you please elaborate 'our fault' and 'dark times'? As a student of history, i reckon those Muslims and (or) Non-Muslims who didn't stand against foreign aggression from west, were on wrong side of the history because those invaders not only killed non Muslims but Muslims also for the lust of power and wealth. If you read history it is evident that it was not a war for some religious motive anyway. They invaded India just like Alexander. last but not least, patriotism doesn't rely on religion at all.

Not keeping up with the latest trends in science and technology, military, trade, travel, conquest as well as the failure to evolve our political structures which could provide a robust basis for human growth. Americans had a constitution when we were rich but spent most of the time in hermes and killing family members for the right to rule.

 

[INDIC]

Who is denying that there was no entity called Pakistan or India for that matter before 1947.

The term India had been in use since 5th century BC for the land East of Indus river first mentioned by Greek historian Herodotus.

 

[PakhtunGuy]

But the leaders who were associated with Pakistan movement came from East of the Radcliffe line like Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan and many came from Bengal.

Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan were definetely not native Pakistanis but they helped us to get our country independent from UK.

Even a farmer with no teeth could have done the same job

 

[SQ8]

Nobody cares. British or europeans could even call them as "Indians" but they were Pashtun, Baloch, Kashmiris, Punjabis and Sindhis and identified themselves for that what they are and fought for their country.

Jinnah identified himself as Gujrati.. are you saying that the founder of Pakistan was not worthy of being Pakistani?
This attitude of only identifying Pakistanis if their heritage came from the boundaries of Pakistan has to stop.. or Pakistan will not last.

Additionally, there were/are Pasthuns/decendants in India today as well. They call themsleves Indians and not Pakistanis..

 

[VCheng]

Who is denying that there was no entity called Pakistan or India for that matter before 1947.

Good, then why take the pains to contort out a connection for Pakistan with the First World War? That history may belong to the regiments, but not to Pakistan, which did not exist at that point.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

India too has never existed. Its territories were divided most of the times. Its only been 'united' as Hindus like to see it by Ashoka (for which there is no independent written account to prove it) and by Orangzaib Alamgir. However none of those 'united entities' lasted together for more than 100-150 years.

It was British Empire.

Columbus wanted to search for Maharashtra? ..and did Vasco da Gama search for Gomantaka/Goa?
Ashoka's accounts are as factually proven as the Roman or Greek accounts. Historically there is no dispute whatsoever. No historian disputes that.

Plus there were extensive Gupta and Maratha periods - which are usually not known to most Pakistanis when the nation was united.

As for the name - yes 'India' came to exist in the people's imagination only in the late 19th century and as a geopolitical entity from 1947 as Dominion of India.

But there were also elaborate descriptions of Aryavarta, Bharata, Mahabharata ... not only in myths but also in documents written, signed, and preserved by visitors, traders, scientists, poets - mentioning that. There was a consciousness regarding what was Bharat and what was not.

Quite distinct to that of 'Pakistan'.

 

[FaujHistorian]

But the leaders who were associated with Pakistan movement came from East of the Radcliffe line like Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan and many came from Bengal.

Bad history!

Again!

Jinnah was born in Karachi.
Iqbal in Sialkot,

Muslim League won majority of Seats in elections/referendums from modern day Punjab and Sindh and KP in Pakistan.


Do you study at all

or just shoot breeze?

 

[INDIC]

Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan were definetely not native Pakistanis but they helped us to get our country independent from UK.

Even a farmer with no teeth could have done the same thing.

Yes, their Pakistan movement for all Muslims residing in British India, not exclusively for Sindhi, Punjabis, Pashtuns and Baloch.

 

[SQ8]

The term India had been in use since 5th century BC for the land East of Indus river first mentioned by Greek historian Herodotus.

Correct, which is why term Indians IMHO should apply to both Pakistanis and Indians pre-47. However, the nations that exist today are Pakistan and Bharat. Not India and Pakistan. Even the Indian state identifies itself as "India that is Bharat".. not India as used to be united with Pakistan, Bangladesh and the land that has been named Bharat.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Columbus wanted to search for Maharashtra? ..and did Vasco da Gama search for Gomantaka/Goa?
Ashoka's accounts are as factually proven as the Roman or Greek accounts. Historically there is no dispute whatsoever. No historian disputes that.

As for the name - yes India came to exist in the people's imagination only in the late 19th century and as a geopolitical entity from 1947 as Dominion of India.

But there were also elaborate descriptions of Aryavarta, Bharata, Mahabharata ... not only in myths but also in documents written, signed, and preserved by visitors, traders, scientists, poets - mentioning that. There was a consciousness regarding what was Bharat and what was not.

Quite distinct to that of 'Pakistan'.

Bhai sahib

If you want to gain respect as a modern day India citizen,

then

give the same to others.

 

[VCheng]

India of today was created on August 15, 1947 (one day later than Pakistan).

Would you deny India all the $hit that happened in UP, Bihar, W.Bengal etc. before that date?

Why you are so prejudiced against single country when it is very similar to others.

It is important to keep in mind the difference between the history of a State and the history of the land and people it comprises.

 

[Desertfalcon]

BYU?

No, I'm Catholic. I went to the University of Utah. BYU are our biggest rivals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_War_%28Utah_vs._BYU%29

 

[Kompromat]

The term India had been in use since 5th century BC for the land East of Indus river first mentioned by Greek historian Herodotus.

That doesn't mean anything in contemporary understanding of the word. That is like saying China, well which one, Qing, Ming, Han, Xin ? - Wei, Shei, Wu kingdoms?

India back then was classified as a region not a country because there was no nation state structure present at that time.

 

[SQ8]

Bad history!

Again!

Jinnah was born in Karachi.
Iqbal in Sialkot,

Muslim League won majority of Seats in elections/referendums from modern day Punjab and Sindh and KP in Pakistan.


Do you study at all

or just shoot breeze?

However, a lot of these leaders had their roots east of that line. Jinnah was Gujrati.. many senior leaders from UP, Bengal.. etc.
It was a national-"Indian" movement which is why it was the All India Muslim league and not the "Punjab-Sindh-NWFP-Balochistan" Muslim league.