CPEC has ZERO economic viability, its a massive cost. Is the purpose something else?

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, panther said:

Afghans were not slaves in ghaznavi armies hindus and turks were lol, we were mercenaries, babur had 1200 yusufzais when he conquered India, Nader shah had thousands of abdalis in his army when he conquered india.  Mughals had thousands of afridis and yusufzais in their armies, they later founded the rohilla state in uttar pradesh. 

 

Khan is an adopted title but most of us have our tribe name as part of our surname.

 

Even rajputs have khan title given to them by mughals. 

 

 

You were not slaves in Ghanznavi army. Which is why during the time of Mehmoud, you guys still kept your old Indo-Iranian names. 

You guys were slaves to Genghis Khan & Hulegu Khan. Slaves to the Hazara. Tribes such as Abdali, Yousufzai, Afridi, paid the mongols slave tax in the form of young women, men & loot.

And sure enough, after being enslaved by the Mongols, you guys adopted the Khan title.

Afghanistan & Pakistan are the same- they take no pride in their ancestor's accomplishments, they do not celebrate the time they were a world power (Afghanistan, not Pakistan) because they were Kaffirs back then. Your ancestors such as Kanishka, Mihir Kula, Taur Mann etc. accomplished far more than Durranis did- both in terms of richness & conquest. But you guys don't celebrate them, because they were Kaffir hindus & buddhists. 

Instead, you celebrate the ones who raped your ancestors, took away your young women to the Khan's harem, took away your men as slaves- the Arabs, the mongols. 

 

So no, i don't consider Afghans & Pakistanis to be anything more than spineless eunuchs who've sold their history to their Arab & Mongol masters. The Persians, like us Indians, are proud of their history and accomplishments. They didnt betray their civilization like you jaahils did.

 

[Muloghonto]

2 hours ago, sandeep said:

Mulo,

 

The whole rape thing is offensive.  Sure a lot of the conversions can be attributed to force, dhimmi tax etc but the way you are characterizing it is not on.

Offensive or not, its true. 
We have documents from the time of the Caliphs, Mongols, Ghaznawi, Ghurids, etc. and they all categorically state that the conquered kaffir lands had to pay taxes in the form of coin, young men for the army & young virgin women for the harem of the overlord emperors, governors, etc.

The entire reason Afghanistan broke free of the Safavids is because a Georgian Safavid general, Gurgin Khan was converting the young virgins handed over to his harem by the Ghilzai tribes to Shia Islam. That was the spark that lit the flame. 

Offensive or not, its fact that these guys were raped over and over by the Arabs, Turks and Mongols.

 

[panther]

14 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Jharkhand's muslim population are all migrant Biharis and Bengalis. British census of 1901 shows <5% Muslims in Jharkhand. 

 

So tell us, if you guys arnt muslim because of greed(exception from Dhimmi tax) and slaughter from invaders, why is it that areas of India that are not ruled by Muslim genociders have negligible muslim population and areas that have been under the highest amount of time of Muslim occupation (such as parts of India that became Pakistan) has the most % of muslims ?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Khayyam , Persians hate arabs because they are shia when they were sunni they had no problem with arab names like omar and abu bakr, also shia believe only 4 companions are correct outside of the prophets family( basically they deem them non muslims), yet sunni persians before safavid rule named their kids all types of arab names. 

the list you posted has all arabic names like mansoor, ahmed, jalal,ibrahim, ismail, asad etc etc 

 

[sandeep]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Offensive or not, its true. 
We have documents from the time of the Caliphs, Mongols, Ghaznawi, Ghurids, etc. and they all categorically state that the conquered kaffir lands had to pay taxes in the form of coin, young men for the army & young virgin women for the harem of the overlord emperors, governors, etc.

The entire reason Afghanistan broke free of the Safavids is because a Georgian Safavid general, Gurgin Khan was converting the young virgins handed over to his harem by the Ghilzai tribes to Shia Islam. That was the spark that lit the flame. 

Offensive or not, its fact that these guys were raped over and over by the Arabs, Turks and Mongols.

 

Well on that logic, there's no evidence that your ancestors were raped too.  Just because your ancestors did not convert, doesn't mean they weren't raped.  How does that sound?

[jalebi_bhai]

29 minutes ago, panther said:

There are twice as many of us in pak, Some are hardcore nationalist others are not, I'm indifferent to it all. 

Their roots are Afghani is the point. As I said, no such thing as Pakistan during the time of Ahmed Shah Durrani. So your claim that he ruled over Pakistan is false. 

[panther]

2 minutes ago, jalebi_bhai said:

Their roots are Afghani is the point. As I said, no such thing as Pakistan during the time of Ahmed Shah Durrani. So your claim that he ruled over Pakistan is false. 

I was referring to the geographical map, which includes all of present day pakistan or most of it anyway. 

[Muloghonto]

8 minutes ago, panther said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Khayyam , Persians hate arabs because they are shia when they were sunni they had no problem with arab names like omar and abu bakr, also shia believe only 4 companions are correct outside of the prophets family( basically they deem them non muslims), yet sunni persians before safavid rule named their kids all types of arab names. 

the list you posted has all arabic names like mansoor, ahmed, jalal,ibrahim, ismail, asad etc etc 

 

If they had no problems with Arab invaders, we'd see at least a few Persians with such names being their rulers before the Safavid Shias. Yet, we have a grand total of ZERO Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, etc. 

Persians have names like Ismail, Jalal, Ahmed because they were not conquered & genocided by people named Jalal, Ahmed, Mansoor, etc. 

Oh And Ismail is not an arab name, its a Jewish name. Same with Ibrahim, which is just arabized version of Abraham.

 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Well on that logic, there's no evidence that your ancestors were raped too.  Just because your ancestors did not convert, doesn't mean they weren't raped.  How does that sound?

Everyone's ancestors were raped at some point or another. Difference between me and the Afghan/Pakistanis is that i do not worship the rapists who raped my ancestors and name important objects & landmarks by their names.

 

[panther]

35 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Jharkhand's muslim population are all migrant Biharis and Bengalis. British census of 1901 shows <5% Muslims in Jharkhand. 

 

So tell us, if you guys arnt muslim because of greed(exception from Dhimmi tax) and slaughter from invaders, why is it that areas of India that are not ruled by Muslim genociders have negligible muslim population and areas that have been under the highest amount of time of Muslim occupation (such as parts of India that became Pakistan) has the most % of muslims ?

 

lol so their were no ahmed, asads in the arab armies?

 

 

[Muloghonto]

Just now, panther said:

lol so their were no ahmed, asads in the arab armies?

 

 

Those arabs, just like most of the arabs, were mindless fools obeying the command of their commanders. The blame for war lies with the commander, not the one following the command. There were no ahmed, Asad, etc. who were commanders decreeing genocide & war on the Persians.

 

[jalebi_bhai]

14 minutes ago, panther said:

I was referring to the geographical map, which includes all of present day pakistan or most of it anyway. 

Accha. Nice of you to make that distinction.

[panther]

15 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If they had no problems with Arab invaders, we'd see at least a few Persians with such names being their rulers before the Safavid Shias. Yet, we have a grand total of ZERO Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, etc. 

Persians have names like Ismail, Jalal, Ahmed because they were not conquered & genocided by people named Jalal, Ahmed, Mansoor, etc. 

Oh And Ismail is not an arab name, its a Jewish name. Same with Ibrahim, which is just arabized version of Abraham.

 

But they are proud persians as you say? so why even have arab names? why call their sons ali, hasan, husein after all they are 'proud persians' lol. 

[_ramkumar]

whoa this thread veered off topic so fast

BTW CPEC provides china direct access to Arabian sea, shorter route to Gulf, Africa and suez canal.

Xinjiang is 60% muslim and they are being oppressed. We all know what happens when minorities are oppressed.

CPEC could provide direct access to Pak-Af extremist, a chance to liberate their oppressed brothers.

Edited November 30, 2016 by _ramkumar

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, Finer said:

CPEC is already started, running as we speak. Hence the proposals in the last few days. In fact, there was recorded videos on the day CPEC started which can be found on Pakistan defense forum.

 

Pakistan actually turned CPEC into the reality now whereas chabar port still remains mystical as Santa.

 

Pakistan isn't turning CPEC into a reality, its China that is doing it. 

We are 10 years late in developing Chabahar, so i don't know why you think the developments will be on same timescale.

 

Also, i found no mention of Germany, England or Russia involved in CPEC anywhere. Could you provide links ?

 

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, panther said:

But they are proud persians as you say? so why even have arab names? why call their sons ali, hasan, husein after all they are 'proud persians' lol. 

Because they are muslims too. 

They are proud persians because they don't celebrate the names who conquered them, enslaved them. That is something Afghans & Pakistanis do. That is the difference. 

Ali, Hussein, Hassan didnt conquer Persia. So their names are fine. Khalid, Waleed, Abu Bakr - they invaded Persia and Persians don't have such names, especially for their own kings.

Afghans were conquered & enslaved by Genghis Khan & Hulegu Khan. Result : All Pashtuns take the name of their enslavers. 

Pakistan was genocided & enslaved by Ghaznawi, Ghauri, etc. Result : Pakistan names their important objects after the very same men who raped & destroyed their ancestors.

 

This is why Persians have pride in their civilization & Afghans/Pakistanis don't.

 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, _ramkumar said:

whoa this thread veered off topic so fast

BTW CPEC provides china direct access to Arabian sea, shorter route to Gulf, Africa and suez canal.

Xinjiang is 60% muslim and they are being oppressed. We all know what happens when minorities are oppressed.

CPEC could provide direct access to Pak-Af extremist a chance to liberate their oppressed brothers.

Shorter route doesnt matter, as land transport is typically 3x more than sea transport. CPEC is developed by China because they can make money off of Pakistani loans and gives them a backup.

 

[_ramkumar]

 

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Shorter route doesnt matter, as land transport is typically 3x more than sea transport. CPEC is developed by China because they can make money off of Pakistani loans and gives them a backup.

 

Land transport is faster than sea transport. CPEC can increase the population of sparsely populated western china..

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, _ramkumar said:

 

Land transport is faster than sea transport. CPEC can increase the population of sparsely populated western china..

It is faster but far more expensive. Most goods we trade - raw materials, finished goods- they end up in storage before being used. Ie, the moment something is offloaded off of a cargo ship, it isn't taken directly to the shops to sell. It goes into warehouses and when the shops run out of their current supply, they take resupply form warehouses.

This is why sea transport is the biggest mover of goods in Asia and Europe- its far more expensive to transport by land than by sea.

On land, you have 1 truck carrying 1 container with 1 driver. On Sea, you have 1 ship, run by 12 people, carrying 300-400 containers. 


Also, CPEC will not raise population of western china- we still need people to have a reason to move to western china en masse or the population of western china to explode. There is nothing to do in western china regarding industry, not much mining activity there and most importantly, those lands are not agricultural lands, so i don't see why their population will explode.

 

 

Edited November 30, 2016 by Muloghonto

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, _ramkumar said:

 

Land transport is faster than sea transport. CPEC can increase the population of sparsely populated western china..

And the land distance is orders of magnitude shorter also.  Its basically economic stimulus for chinese companies and attempting to assist economic and industrial development in interior china with greater connectivity.  So far, all the development and factories are concentrated on the eastern seaboard.  So Idea is good from China's point of view, and cost is not only low, it is also being subsidized by the client nations.  

 

Its good that India is trying to do something similar with SAARC, and due to Pak foot-dragging, will do so under the BIMSTEC banner.  21st Century trade and economic growth will happen with greater integration and ease of transport.  Those who throw up barriers due self-constructed phobias and paranoia will be left behind.  

[_ramkumar]

India Mekong economic corridor with help BIMSTEC has more potential than CPEC but our govt won't fast track the project because center isn't interested in North-east.

India's Look East policy will get booster shot if this corridor is given more funding. India can't Look East if we ignore North-East.

Instead of discussing economic feasibility of CPEC we should look forward doing something of similar scale... all those FTAs with South East can go to waste if we can't build cross border infra. 

 

Edited November 30, 2016 by _ramkumar