What's new

Whatever

.
99408281_3023848711035755_6010812863965298688_n.jpg
 
. .
In a world already Hybridised in broadest sense... World Military forum... has only 'classical' sections @PanzerKiel ...all about ClockworkWarfare!

It misses a few sub-sections as:

1- WeaponisedFinanceWarfare
2- BiologicalWarfare
3- CyberWarfare
4- SpaceWarfare
5- Automated /AI enabled RoboticWarfare


Would be nice to have such sub-sections... gives a better differentiation of the 'World Military' ....

Mangus

@Slav Defence @WebMaster
 
. .
In a world already Hybridised in broadest sense... World Military forum... has only 'classical' sections @PanzerKiel ...all about ClockworkWarfare!

It misses a few sub-sections as:

1- WeaponisedFinanceWarfare
2- BiologicalWarfare
3- CyberWarfare
4- SpaceWarfare
5- Automated /AI enabled RoboticWarfare


Would be nice to have such sub-sections... gives a better differentiation of the 'World Military' ....

Mangus

@Slav Defence @WebMaster

Excellent suggestion.
 
. .
20200526_192418.jpg

@Naofumi

Here's some home insurance policies for you incase some mobs burn down your house.


What do they call you there? Katua or k2ua? Haha enjoy being treated like a dog. Don't get beaten up by your girlfriend's brother for doing love jihad.
 
.
Did the symbols like Bharat Mata and other Hindu imagery like the romanticisation of Marathas had any negative effects on inclusive Indian Nationalism?
@Joe Shearer
 
. .
India survived as a Hindu nation because of us Marathas.

Have no doubts on that score.
How we interpret the history has effects on the political narratives. My question is in relation to that.
 
. .
This map of the Maratha confederacy pre British is not interpretation.

It's fact.
Some context.
India as a civilisation existed since at least 500 BC, the modern Pan-Indian identity is modelled after the European idea of nation-state starting from the 1900s.

The "Bharat Mata" was first drawn in 1905.

Even older arguments can be made like when Marathas declared that "This is Hindu Shahi, we will capture and rule all lands till Constantinople".

Edit : I don't agree with this kind of exclusionary historical interpretation.

@Joe Shearer

I can explain this in great detail to you, for use in future discussions; in short, the arguments that you have had to face are completely frivolous, and find a footing only in the unbridled jingoism of one side. Perhaps some time later, somewhere else, or even in a thread on PDF other than this one.

I agree that it was exclusionary jingoism and that's the inherent problem that the subcontinent faced.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom