AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
I have no problems with Pakistan merging with Iran and Afghanistan. In fact I saw a thread here sometime back calling for just that. If Pakistanis can live as peacefully as Indians have so far in a national union of Iran-Pak-Afghanistan, I'm happy for them.
And I'm not arbitrarily defining a region either. The Indian subcontinent is a distinct geographical region with distinct geographical boundaries - the Baluchistan desert, Himalayas, north-eastern jungles and the Indian ocean. It's people look similar to each other by and large and share a common history. Of course, with the Partition, India is no longer at its geographical boundaries and also has minorities that were not historically Indian. But that is a tragedy of history one has to live with.
We even have a separate tectonic plate from Asia!
But you are arbitrarily defining a region, even geographically. The Indus valley plains in Pakistan make a distinct geographical feature as well, as do the arid Baluchistan mountains and plains, as do the deserts of Sindh-Rajasthan, as do the jungles of East India, Bangladesh, Myanmar etc.
You are picking the geographical boundaries you prefer and arguing that because the were lumped into one regional classification, that enforces the 'nation' argument.
Why should we stop with the classification of the sub-continent, why not argue for nationhood on the basis of 'Asia'?
That is a regional classification based on geographical features/boundaries as well after all.