Panipat (film) 2019 – A Stark Reminder to The Muslims of Hindustan About Their Betrayal

[SIPRA]

You seem more eager for battle than Indian deluded rulers you mentioned. Think with a sane mind.

We Muslims are a little bit more fond of battles.

 

[blueazure]

Isn't that a good thing? Doesn't it prove Hindus are peaceful and mind their own business? And on the other hand, many Pakistanis believe Hindus are cruel and what not.

no ,

it just means indians were a weak, fragmented, coward nation who never properly opposed an invasion or took a stand .

to the invaders themselves, india was an over painted whore who they enjoyed and relished

 

[PakSword]

You're forgetting the fact that caste and caste like hierarchical structures, essentially serfdom, absolved many of the marathas from actually being in a position to fight. The same hierarchical structures that provided ancient Hindus with loyal and dutiful servitude in centuries past becomes their undoing when suddenly untrained, illiterate hordes are expected to understand the need to unite and fight against an invader that is numerically superior. This is not exclusively a Hindu issue. Throughout history, creation of feudalistic serfdom based societies is always a double edged sword. The masses should not be deliberately kept ignorant and untrained, as this will prove costly when the real test comes.

What you are saying might be true, but why India?? India has been invaded for more than a 100 times after Alexander the Great first invaded it.



Which Country Has Been Invaded The Most?
According to some accounts, India is the most invaded country in the history of the world.

Although the exact answer is up for debate, there are compelling reasons to believe that India may just be the most invaded country of all time. Foreigners have invaded the state over 200 times. The first person to successfully invade India was Alexander the Great in the year 321 BCE while the last people were the British who finally give way for an independent India.

[Source]

Indians should be thankful to British who at last gave them some face saving in over 2000 years of their history.

 

[SIPRA]

You're forgetting the fact that caste and caste like hierarchical structures, essentially serfdom, absolved many of the marathas from actually being in a position to fight. The same hierarchical structures that provided ancient Hindus with loyal and dutiful servitude in centuries past becomes their undoing when suddenly untrained, illiterate hordes are expected to understand the need to unite and fight against an invader that is numerically superior. This is not exclusively a Hindu issue. Throughout history, creation of feudalistic serfdom based societies is always a double edged sword. The masses should not be deliberately kept ignorant and untrained, as this will prove costly when the real test comes.

Yes. I read somewhere that in medieval Hindu armies, caste structure also seriously hindered with the meritocracy. In contrast, in Muslim armies, often a bought up slave could rise to become commander, within a short time. Another reason, that author gave was excessive use of opium by most of the Rajput commanders, even during the battles.

 

[blueazure]

What you are saying might be true, but why India?? India has been invaded for more than a 100 times after Alexander the Great first invaded it.

see ,

the indians , in their history , never attempted to "stop" an invasion . they preferred to conspire, provide intelligence and maybe become foot soldiers ( like the rajpoots bowed to akbar) ..

not a single thermopyle in their history

 

[Buddhistforlife]

Bollywood movie Panipat carrying the tag line; The Great Betrayal, is about to be released and is gathering quite a ruckus on social media already which is good for promotion but sensitive for the Pashtuns of Pakistan and Afghanistan since the main antagonist of the movie is none other than Ahmad Shah Abdali, a Sufi warrior, poet and king of 18th century which they hold in high esteem.

The portrayal of Muslims in Bollywood has long been a subject of controversy and ridicule. The common stereotypes being used has generated many memes.


View attachment 588563


Ahmad Shah Durrani (c. 1722 – 16 October 1772) also known as Ahmad Khan Abdali was the founder of the Abdali Empire and modern-day Afghanistan.

The Third battle of Panipat was fought between Abdali's Afghan forces and the Maratha forces in January 1761, in which the Rohillas of UP, Afghans of the Doab region and Nawab of Awadh sided with Invading forces and resulted in a decisive Abdali victory hence extending his control from Khorasan in the west to Kashmir and North India in the east, and from the Amu Darya in the north to the Arabian Sea in the south.

Abdali's mausoleum is located at Kandahar, Afghanistan, adjacent to the Shrine of the Cloak in the centre of the city. Afghans often refer to him as Ahmad Shah Baba.

The role of Ahmed Shah Abdali will be played by Sanjay Dutt. From a few scenes in the trailer, it can be gathered that Muslims are being portrayed as the barbaric hordes of illiterates’ hell-bent on destruction while Hindu territory is the centre of peace and enlightenment.

The movie will serve to malign the Muslims west of the border and jab at the minorities east of the border for their questionable alliances.

In my opinion, although it is true that Muslim rulers who ruled India carried out atrocities against Hindus and others, but they were far more tolerant than Arabs, Ottoman Muslims to some extent and Middle eastern Muslims.

Muslim rulers who ruled India were generally secular and did not interfere in the activities of Hindus. Even Hindus served as prime ministers and army chiefs In the court of Muslim kingdoms like Nizam of Hyderabad, Delhi Sultanate and Mughal empire. Hemchandra Vikramaditya was a prominent prime minister in the court of Adil Shah who is highly respected in India. Many muslim rulers even translated Ramayana and Mahabharata in Persian and used to propagate them.

Contrarily the Arab and middle eastern Muslim kingdoms like the Ummayud, Abbasid and Rashidun Caliphate, Almohads, Fatmids, Mamluks etc charged Jizya on non muslims, barred non Muslims from holding government office, prohibited building of churches and synagogues and most importantly hated idol worshippers which led to violence against Yazidi, Druze, Zoroastrian and Nuristani communities.

You can easily see the difference. Muslims ruled India for 800 years yet India is still a Hindu majority area. But Christianity, Zoroastrianism and Judaism disappeared from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Yemen

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

no ,

it just means indians were a weak, fragmented, coward nation who never properly opposed an invasion or took a stand .

to the invaders themselves, india was an over painted whore who they enjoyed and relished

So you are calling peaceful people weak, coward, etc? Your mind has been infected with hate and prejudice. Go do some meditation or something. And not only India, both India and Pakistan bore the brunt of invasions. Or are you saying Pakistan was strangely immune and Alexander, Ghouri,etc just jumped over Pakistan and invaded India while Pakistan defended valiantly? So the statement you used 'it just means indians were a weak, fragmented, coward nation who never properly opposed an invasion or took a stand.' applies to Pakistan as well since present day Pakistan was the first to get invaded before present day India.

 

[PakSword]

see ,

the indians , in their history , never attempted to "stop" an invasion . they preferred to conspire, provide intelligence and maybe become foot soldiers ( like the rajpoots bowed to akbar) ..

not a single thermopyle in their history

Exactly.

If you look at history of any other region, you will notice that locals controlled the lands mostly through out the history, in case of India, it is opposite..

What is even there to feel proud of the vedic history they boast about 24x7?

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

see ,

the indians , in their history , never attempted to "stop" an invasion . they preferred to conspire, provide intelligence and maybe become foot soldiers ( like the rajpoots bowed to akbar) ..

not a single thermopyle in their history

The problem with you and I think most Pakistanis is that you look from religious lens. If Pakistan is so valiant, why did you bow to the British and why not just 'coward' Indians as you say? Why were so many Muslim soldiers were serving in the British army instead of serving and defending India/Pakistan?

Think objectively my friend but before that remove all prejudice.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

But it still doesn't answer why Abdali is respected so much in Pakistan as he is from Afghanistan right? Or is he respected just because he killed 'evil Hindus' in Panipat and sacked Mathura (city mostly of Hindus) and slaughtered unarmed civilians over there as well? Read about Abdali's slaughter in Mathura as well.

It's not that he killed Hindus per se. But rather that he killed those God awful tiresome "holier than thou conspiring to subdue simple ignorant folk" nobles who happened to be Hindu. Any dent in braministani ideology or its precursors should be celebrated.

 

[B.K.N]

but why India?? India has been invaded for more than a 100 times after Alexander the Great first invaded it.

People from mountainous areas where life was difficult migrated to or invaded plains
There wasn't any army or natural barrier to guard these plains

 

[jamahir]

But Christianity, Zoroastrianism and Judaism disappeared from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon

Incorrect.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Marathas are next in line for vir chakra apparently after abhinandan set the standard for losing yet still "winning".

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

To be honest, I don't see any Indian Christian celebrating British invasion like Muslims celebrate Islamic invasion of India. Indian Christians know that Britishers are outsiders. That's it. No confusion.

 

[jamahir]

The problem with you and I think most Pakistanis is that you look from religious lens. If Pakistan is so valiant, why did you bow to the British and why not just 'coward' Indians as you say? Why were so many Muslim soldiers were serving in the British army instead of serving and defending India/Pakistan?

Think objectively my friend but before that remove all prejudice.

The thing is some part of PDF provides for nationalistic thought and that clouds the mind into not talking objectively.

Indian Christians know that Britishers are outsiders.

What about the Anglo-Indians ?? Just curious.