Is Pak the national self-expression of the Indus Valley or is it remnant of N.Indian Islamic empires

[Hamza913]

Hehe,,me childish,,when u quote random tribes n call there aggregate as some "muslim empire".

They established kingdoms across the region, and many of them existed at the same time, so that's a sizeable portion of land.

The first "indigenous empire" tht came to ur mind is kalhora

What's wrong with them? Being a vassal state is no knock on them, they still ruled themselves and eventually ruled independently.

they trace thr lineage to abbasids n egypt.

Dozens of Syeds do, that doesn't mean they're no longer Pakistani/Indian.

Well,,after the first decided not to delve deeper into the other "indigenous empires" u posted.

Because you're an idiot who is just looking for cheap talking points, not any actual facts. Two can play at that game:

Now kneel.

 

[Adonis]

You gave your own answer... none of the examples you gave had or wished Islam as a unifier. They instead used nationalism, ethnocentrism, language as exclusionary forces. Now, read what you wrote above.

Read the post against which I responded....He termed Religion is key to keep people bonded... and I contradicted.
Now, you please read again and comprehend.

 

[Imad.Khan]

Yes but many of them have inferiority complex and think they are descendants from these invaders for example they say hindus hate Muslims because they ruled their country but they forgot that they are themselves are descendants of these Hindus who their ancestors became Muslims because of the Arab afghan Turkic Mongolian invaders that they glorify they make you feel that these invaders are their ancestors and not the ones who subjected their Hindu ancestors

I am Pukhtoon, so i am happy to accept the invader tag, however we wern't always Muslims, nor were Arabs, Turks, Mongols or Central Asians. We are all descendants of converts.

This means that the other proposition is true---------->Pakistan is the rump state/successor of Turkic Islamic empires that ruled over the North India

You forgot to add Pukhtoons/Afghan Islamic empires

 

[dani92]

No. You were invaded by Arabs after the advent of Islam who raped your people and injected a ruling elite. In addition Arabic was foisted on you.

Most of the Paks here get wobbly when the hear the word 'Arab'. Me. It has no effect. Other than Islam which is a 'act of god' they have done nothing other than ride camels. Generic Arabs are from Arabian peninsula. North Africa, Levant including Iraq was not Arab. It was made up of differant ethnic groups like Berbers, Assyrians, Fellahin, Phoenicians etc

Afteer invasion and Arab colonization all this region slowly adopted Arabic language simiiar to how Spanish invasion of South American led to native people mixing with Spanish invaders creating the polyglot we call Latin America or Hispanics who speak Spanish.

Like I said modern Iraqi's are just bastardized Arabs.

When the Arabs conquered Egypt, they called the common peasant indigenous people (Copts) fellahin (peasants) due to their work in agriculture different from the Jews who were traders and the Greeks (Rum in Arabic) who were the ruling class . With the passage of time the name took on an ethnic character, when Egyptian Arab tribes call someone else fellah it is synonymous with "indigenous Egyptian" to some extent. Another thought is that when a Christian Egyptian converted to Islam he was called 'falih' which means winner or victorious, which means that he succeeded in abondaning Christianity and converting to Islam.

The Arabs invaded Mesopotamia with advent of Islam, brought Arabic language, Arabized you like English Anglosized Black in West India. Jamaicans today speak English and are mostly Church of England followers. That does not make then ENGLISH. And note "Arab conquest of Iraq".

The Islamic expansions constituted the largest of the Semitic expansions in history. These new arrivals did not disperse and settle throughout the country; instead they established two new garrison cities, at al-Kūfah, near ancient Babylon, and at Basrah in the south, while the north remained largely Assyrian and Christian in character.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Iraq#Arab_conquest

Islam is an Arab nationalistic religion was founded to unite the Arabs but the abbasids made it international and they made Arabs suffer for it.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Islam is an Arab nationalistic religion was founded to unite the Arabs

When it was founded you were not Arabs, neither were the Assyrians, neither the Phoenicians, neither the Egyptians etc.

Yeh all got raped and bastardized into 'Arabs'. Exactly like what Spanish did to the natives of America making modern day Latinos.

 

[Imad.Khan]

Islam is an Arab nationalistic religion was founded to unite the Arabs but the abbasids made it international and they made Arabs suffer for it.

So you admit that Arabs are also converts? Can you also share your historical knowledge of Mesopotamia, do you consider them to be Arabs

 

[SIPRA]

I am Pukhtoon, so i am happy to accept the invader tag, however we wern't always Muslims, nor were Arabs, Turks, Mongols or Central Asians. We are all descendants of converts.

Every person, today living on this planet, is descendant of some converts.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

They established kingdoms across the region, and many of them existed at the same time, so that's a sizeable portion of land.



What's wrong with them? Being a vassal state is no knock on them, they still ruled themselves and eventually ruled independently.



Dozens of Syeds do, that doesn't mean they're no longer Pakistani/Indian.



Because you're an idiot who is just looking for cheap talking points, not any actual facts. Two can play at that game:

Now kneel.

That map is fake!

 

[Hamza913]

That map is fake!

Lmao no it isn't, on what authority do you make that claim?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

So you admit that Arabs are also converts? Can you also share your historical knowledge of Mesopotamia, do you consider them to be Arabs

The reification of 'Arabs' as a people began as a process after the advent of Islam. Mesopotamians were not Arabs, neither were Assyrians, neither the Philistines, neither the Phoenicians [modern Lebanese], neither the Egyptian fallatin, neither the Maghrebi Berbers of Algeria or Marocco. All these varied ethnic groups were conquered and colonized [or raped if you like] by invaders from Arabian peninsula at advent of Islam and then 'Arabized'. That is they all adopted Arabic language although each has a differant iterations. Arabs today are not a race. They are many races/ethnic groups mangled together who speak Arabic. The common underlayer is trace of Arab which varies by country. Lebanese or Syrians have more European/Near Eastern blood then Arab. A Lebanese looks more like a Turk, Greek or Italian then a Emirati or Saudi.

As regards Iraq [Mesopptamia] they have a mixed blood pool. In north they have huge Kurdish contribution, north west Assyrian with centre mixed. Toward the south they have greater peninsula blood.

The best comparison is Latinos of America. They all speak Spanish but on one end of continuum they are 99% native Amerindian blood like Aztecs, Incas etc On the other hand 99% European of Spanish stock. Then you have milliions falling in between language and history being the common thread. This is exactly what Arabs are like today.

90% of Arabs today are convert, conquered peoples.

 

[dani92]

When it was founded you were not Arabs, neither were the Assyrians, neither the Phoenicians, neither the Egyptians etc.

Yeh all got raped and bastardized into 'Arabs'. Exactly like what Spanish did to the natives of America making modern day Latinos.

Yeah dumb *** I am not a muslim but that doesn't change to fact that Islam is an arab nationalistic religion and do you think the arabs will follow it if it was a pakistani religion of course not lol.

No. You were invaded by Arabs after the advent of Islam who raped your people and injected a ruling elite. In addition Arabic was foisted on you.

Most of the Paks here get wobbly when the hear the word 'Arab'. Me. It has no effect. Other than Islam which is a 'act of god' they have done nothing other than ride camels. Generic Arabs are from Arabian peninsula. North Africa, Levant including Iraq was not Arab. It was made up of differant ethnic groups like Berbers, Assyrians, Fellahin, Phoenicians etc

Afteer invasion and Arab colonization all this region slowly adopted Arabic language simiiar to how Spanish invasion of South American led to native people mixing with Spanish invaders creating the polyglot we call Latin America or Hispanics who speak Spanish.

Like I said modern Iraqi's are just bastardized Arabs.

When the Arabs conquered Egypt, they called the common peasant indigenous people (Copts) fellahin (peasants) due to their work in agriculture different from the Jews who were traders and the Greeks (Rum in Arabic) who were the ruling class . With the passage of time the name took on an ethnic character, when Egyptian Arab tribes call someone else fellah it is synonymous with "indigenous Egyptian" to some extent. Another thought is that when a Christian Egyptian converted to Islam he was called 'falih' which means winner or victorious, which means that he succeeded in abondaning Christianity and converting to Islam.

The Arabs invaded Mesopotamia with advent of Islam, brought Arabic language, Arabized you like English Anglosized Black in West India. Jamaicans today speak English and are mostly Church of England followers. That does not make then ENGLISH. And note "Arab conquest of Iraq".

The Islamic expansions constituted the largest of the Semitic expansions in history. These new arrivals did not disperse and settle throughout the country; instead they established two new garrison cities, at al-Kūfah, near ancient Babylon, and at Basrah in the south, while the north remained largely Assyrian and Christian in character.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Iraq#Arab_conquest

And does that change the fact that Islam is the national religion of arabs?!

So you admit that Arabs are also converts? Can you also share your historical knowledge of Mesopotamia, do you consider them to be Arabs

Yeah the arabs are converted to an arab religion and not a foreign religion like you retards do.

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Islam is an Arab nationalistic religion was founded to unite the Arabs

proof?

but the abbasids made it international and they made Arabs suffer for it.

the conquests of non arab land started way before Abbasids.

 

[gwangju.khan]

It is beneficial to identify with Indus Valley and territorial boundaries but they should be of a secondary status.

Otherwise if you revise the identity of Pakistan to being something other than an Indo-Muslim state, it would be hard to explain why the Nizam of Hyderabad tried to join Pakistan or why was Bangladesh part of Pakistan until 1971

View attachment 616044 View attachment 616046

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

Yeah dumb *** I am not a muslim but that doesn't change to fact that Islam is an arab nationalistic religion and do you think the arabs will follow it if it was a pakistani religion of course not lol.


And does that change the fact that Islam is the national religion of arabs?!


Yeah the arabs are converted to an arab religion and not a foreign religion like you retards do.

Bring your best case and let me deconstruct it for you dani boy. Do you even know what Islam means? What is more frustrating is that a self professed NoN Muslim is spewing hot air at something he/she has no business saying...

 

[gwangju.khan]

I dont know what they are,,,,but they r definitely not remenants of 'northindian islamic empire(thr is difference between ruler n the ruled,,the master n the slave)

Among the people you call "slaves" was the Barha Sayyid Clan who had roots in Punjab and settled in Northern India, who rose to prominence in the Mughal court and deposed Emperors at will, using them as figureheads:

"Finally in a hurried conference, it was decided to raise 'Bidar Dil to the throne[as a puppet]...the women refused to open the doors and started wailing and crying. In vain the emissions shouted that they had been sent to fetch Bidar Dil to make him emperor, but the women had convinced themselves that the Sayyids were about to begin a general massacre of all the Mughal princes prior to assuming the throne themselves, and refused to unbolt"
G.S. Cheema, The Forgotten Mughals, pp. 134-35.

This does not look like the work of slaves to me.