roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
read: people born in the land area of part of Pakistan's history. It doesnt matter whether outsiders call them indian or brazilian.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
read: people born in the land area of part of Pakistan's history. It doesnt matter whether outsiders call them indian or brazilian.
read: people born in the land area of part of Pakistan's history. It doesnt matter whether outsiders call them indian or brazilian.
Actually when one refers to a civilization the relatively modern nation state doesn't need to be taken into account. There is Ancient Arabia, but you would not refer to it as Ancient UAE because we are talking civilizations, not nations.
If the reference was Ancient Saudi Arabia to mean all of Arabia, you would indeed need to qualify this as Ancient UAE.
so as long as outsiders refer to everything as Indian history, it must be true? It is no wonder India (modern) doesnt have a history. You let outsiders write it for you.
That is what you guys are claiming.
We say its a shared heritage/culture b/n India & Pak...like how the Arabian civilization is shared between today's KSA, UAE,Oman etc.
---------- Post added at 08:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 AM ----------
Only indic tribes of pakistan have claim on sub continents history, balooch, pashtuns have no claim whatsoever.
it's like talking to a brick wall.
obviously all the civilizations and scholars of note that came from baloch or pashtun lands are part of baloch or pashtun history. if these lands happen to fall within the land mass of modern pakistan, it is part of pakistan's history.
whether these would fall under subcontinent history depends on how you define the subcontinent. If they don't fall within, then remove them, if they do then keep. However saying they're part of Indian history is incorrect, they're part of the history of the country known today as Pakistan.
That is how all history is written.
No you dont,but you lose your history which you grossly insulted.
Especially when you convert into something which thinks low of your current practices/culture.
Of course you don't lose your history. If you convert from one job to another, is your previous job not part of your history?
India and Indians wholeheartedly support Iran when almost all of middle east is against Iran !
New Recruit
So India is joining Iran to form the axis of evils? Indeed, with Iraq becoming good, India takes up the place of the new axis of evils.
the revisionists are you. The creation of Hinduism occurred sometime between the Artherveda and the Yajurveda somewhere in the gangetic plains.
---------- Post added at 08:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 PM ----------
buddhism isnt extinct. many people in the far east practise it.
Ancient Arabia is a very acceptable description because there is no country called Arabia. You follow so far?
Because there is no country called Arabia people understand that it is a shared history from Tunisia till Oman.
Ancient India isn't acceptable because there is a country called India that appears to try and hog achievements that mostly don't belong to it. If there was no country called India, then it would be more acceptable, but even so the civilizations would be incorrectly skewed.