What's new

Is There a Storm Brewing !

1400 years of victory? Please come out of your delusion. Current Pakistani land was the first to be conquered by invading armies before current Indian land. Tell me one ruler from present day Pakistan who ruled over large swathes of land. All invaders are Afghans, Tajiks, Iranians, etc. In fact, present day Pakistan has suffered more due to invasions.
And if Pakistanis are so different, why were you subjected to British rule? Please be more rational.
Anyway, this superiority complex of Pakistan is the reason that it has been defeated in past wars. Indians just take advantage of your superiority complex and surprise you. Tell me if Pakistanis are so athletic, physically superior and all, why do you bring so less medals in CWG and Asian Games. Let's forget sports like shooting and archery. Even in sports like wrestling and Kabaddi, India performs way better than Pakistan.
These are all facts unlike your blind rhetoric of Pakistanis are superior than Indians.
Thanks for reading and being taught trash whole life. You say me delusional? Let me rephrase that correctly, you whole life is a DELUSION born with your GREAT HISTORY BOOKS AND YOUR 100+ major war victories against Pakistan, China, USA, Russia, Wakanda, Asgard, Atlantis and your own BRAIN.

Try to re-read my post to find out the concept of 1400 years MUSLIM history before whining like the KID you are grown to be...
 
.
British classified races in India into two categories. Martial and non martial. Pashtun, sikhs, jatts, maratha etc are martial races. Most of the population of Pakistan consists of martial races.
We are not over estimating us. Look at kashmir, you have about 5 men to one soldier ratio to maintain peace.
Let's suppose tomorrow, all our ammunition/nukes, planes, tanks and army vanishes. India still cannot defeat a nation consisting of 22 cror people having martial race.
About supports, Pakistan having smaller talent pool (22 cror) will always lose to India having larger talent pool(120 cror) . Simple math
There is no such thing as martial race. We are not keeping 5 men to one soldier to maintain peace because we have a big threat. It's to keep Pakistani infiltration in check. We don't want to do the same mistake that Pakistan did in 1971.

And regarding military, India has a better a success percentage than Pakistan. Pakistan went thrice to war over Kashmir but couldn't capture it. India went to war over BD just once, and created an independent country. Look at it as you like. India is simply better strategically, tactically. India also keeps its territories under control when many people were predicting that India would break apart in less than 10 years after independence.

Even by the logic of martial race, Pakistanis should win more medals than India in physical sports. We have Kabaddi players, wrestlers and boxers belonging from all backgrounds and not just martial race. Pakistanis should atleast beat Indians in areas of their strong point right? But it doesn't. British idea of martial race is a flawed one. They called Sikhs martial and kept them in the army. They called Jats martial and kept them in their army. They just wanted Indian/Pakistani soldiers nothing else.

And you can keep believing in martial race concept. But this is the 21st century. A country with more brains is the stronger country. And you won't achieve anything if you keep living in the past. This is just my suggestion.
 
.
There is no such thing as martial race. We are not keeping 5 men to one soldier to maintain peace because we have a big threat. It's to keep Pakistani infiltration in check. We don't want to do the same mistake that Pakistan did in 1971.

And regarding military, India has a better a success percentage than Pakistan. Pakistan went thrice to war over Kashmir but couldn't capture it. India went to war over BD just once, and created an independent country. Look at it as you like. India is simply better strategically, tactically. India also keeps its territories under control when many people were predicting that India would break apart in less than 10 years after independence.

Even by the logic of martial race, Pakistanis should win more medals than India in physical sports. We have Kabaddi players, wrestlers and boxers belonging from all backgrounds and not just martial race. Pakistanis should atleast beat Indians in areas of their strong point right? But it doesn't. British idea of martial race is a flawed one. They called Sikhs martial and kept them in the army. They called Jats martial and kept them in their army. They just wanted Indian/Pakistani soldiers nothing else.

And you can keep believing in martial race concept. But this is the 21st century. A country with more brains is the stronger country. And you won't achieve anything if you keep living in the past. This is just my suggestion.
Just by reading your second para, i bet you are small kid with no sense of “STRATEGICS”.
You will be ignored further from now on.
@Mangus Ortus Novem Kindly avoid wasting words on this kid further and this goes for all others.
 
. .
Thanks for reading and being taught trash whole life. You say me delusional? Let me rephrase that correctly, you whole life is a DELUSION born with your GREAT HISTORY BOOKS AND YOUR 100+ major war victories against Pakistan, China, USA, Russia, Wakanda, Asgard, Atlantis and your own BRAIN.

Try to re-read my post to find out the concept of 1400 years MUSLIM history before whining like the KID you are grown to be...
Are you even arguing with me? Atleast state facts please. No I don't believe in 100+ major war victories, etc.
If you are talking about Muslim history, then I can't feel more sorry for you. So you are happy about brutal invaders just because they belong to the same religion as you? Why aren't you happy with ISIS then as even they belong to the same religion as you. You conveniently forgot my question about a Pakistani king who was stronger than Rajputs, Mughals, Adil Shahs, Marathas, etc. You won't get far if you take pride in someone else's achievements. Again what I'm stating are facts. I fully admit that Muslims were more militarily advanced than Hindus in the past. But it doesn't mean they were correct. And it doesn't mean they were present day Pakistan kings. Basically, you are taking pride over someone else's victory because they belong to the same religion. It's like a Pakistani/Indian Christian considering himself as the leader of British invasion of India, Middle East, Africa.
And that was past. This is present.
 
. . . .
Are you even arguing with me? Atleast state facts please. No I don't believe in 100+ major war victories, etc.
If you are talking about Muslim history, then I can't feel more sorry for you. So you are happy about brutal invaders just because they belong to the same religion as you? Why aren't you happy with ISIS then as even they belong to the same religion as you. You conveniently forgot my question about a Pakistani king who was stronger than Rajputs, Mughals, Adil Shahs, Marathas, etc. You won't get far if you take pride in someone else's achievements. Again what I'm stating are facts. I fully admit that Muslims were more militarily advanced than Hindus in the past. But it doesn't mean they were correct. And it doesn't mean they were present day Pakistan kings. Basically, you are taking pride over someone else's victory because they belong to the same religion. It's like a Pakistani/Indian Christian considering himself as the leader of British invasion of India, Middle East, Africa.
And that was past. This is present.
Fake history is taught in both India and Pakistan.
1) we are taught that Islamic rulers were very righteous. In fact they were piece of shit. Even most admired one Aurangzeb killed almost all of his family to become king. He killed more Muslims than hindus.
2) RSS is teaching you that Hindu Kings were very good and Muslims were invaders. Fact of the matter is, even before Muhammad bin Qasim, hindus Kings were killing each other. Majority of army of Muslim rulers consisted of hindus. Maratha army had many Muslims fighting against abdali.
Before British divided India on communal lines, Indians never thought on Hindu Muslim lines.
 
. . .
Pakistan went thrice to war over Kashmir but couldn't capture it.
I thought Pakistan did forcibly gain control of a bit over a third of pre partition J and K. It's India that can't take their lost sovereign territory back, and instead has annexed the bit of territory it forcibly controlled all along. In fact your own defence minister clearly speaks of "reclaiming" India's lost portion of Kashmir from Pakistan.
 
. . .
I thought Pakistan did forcibly gain control of a bit over a third of pre partition J and K. It's India that can't take their lost sovereign territory back, and instead has annexed the bit of territory it forcibly controlled all along. In fact your own defence minister clearly speaks of "reclaiming" India's lost portion of Kashmir from Pakistan.

Pakistan took control of that part of Kashmir that was not under Indian control. It was under the control of ruler of Kashmir. When Indian army was sent in, Pakistan had already taken half of Kashmir.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom