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

[panther]

19 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

1. Tareq, emad, sayyad, babr, nasir are not names of people who invaded and genocided Iran. Those names are Abu Bakr, Khalid ibn Walid, Sayyid Abi Waqqas, Umar Ibn Khattab, etc.

 

2. If most Indian muslims are not a result of rapes and pillages, explain to us why areas of India where muslims did not rule directly, such as Orissa, Assam, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, etc. have <5% muslims. 

Well i googled that and Jharkhand has 15% muslim population.

[sandeep]

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.

[panther]

11 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

where do u get such nonsense ?

 

list of Persian rulers:

(Dayubids)

• Gil Gavbara (640-660)
• Dabuya (660-676)
• Farrukhan the Great (712-728)
• Dadhburzmihr (728-740/41)
• Farrukhan the Little (740/41-747/48) as regent for
• Khurshid (741-759/60)

• Farrukhzad (651–665)
• Valash (usurper, 665–673)
• Surkhab I (673–717)
• Mihr Mardan (717–755)
• Surkhab II (755–772)
• Sharwin I (772–817)
• Shahriyar I (817–825)
• Shapur (825)
• Rule by the Karenid Mazyar (825-839)
• Qarin I (839–867)
• Rustam I (867–895)
• Sharwin II (896–930)
• Shahriyar II (930–964)
• Rustam II (964–979)
• Al-Marzuban (979–986)
• Sharwin III (986)
• Shahriyar III (986-987)
• Al-Marzuban (987–998)
• Shahriyar III (998)
• Al-Marzuban (998-1006)
• Abu Ja'far Muhammad (???-1027)
• Qarin II (1057-1074)

Ispahbadhiyya[edit]

• Shahriyar IV (1074–1114)
• Qarin III (1114–1117)
• Rustam III (1117–1118)
• Ali I (1118–1142)
• Shah Ghazi Rustam IV (1142–1165)
• Hasan I (1165–1173)
• Ardashir I (1173–1205)
• Rustam V (1205–1210)

Kinkhwariyya[edit]

• Ardashir II (1238–1249)
• Muhammad (1249–1271)
• Ali II (1271)
• Yazdagird (1271–1300)
• Shahriyar V (1300–1310)
• Kay Khusraw ibn Yazdagird (1310–1328)
• Sharaf al-Muluk (1328-1334)
• Hasan II

Tahir ibn Husayn	821-822
Talha ibn Tahir	822-828
Abdallah ibn Tahir al-Khurasani	828-845
Tahir (II) ibn Abdallah	845-862
Muhammad ibn Tahir (II)	862-873
Governors of Baghdad
Tahir ibn Husayn	820-822
Ishaq ibn Ibrahim al-Mus'abi	822-850
Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Ibrahim	850-851
Abdallah ibn Ishaq ibn Ibrahim	851
Muhammad ibn Abdallah ibn Tahir	851-867
Ubaydallah ibn Abdallah ibn Tahir	867-869
Sulayman ibn Abdallah ibn Tahir	869-879
Ubaydallah ibn Abdallah (again)	879-885
Muhammad ibn Tahir (II)	885-890
Ubaydallah ibn Abdallah (again)

 

Saman Khuda Persian: سامان خدا‎‎ (A Persian landowner from the village of Saman in Balkh province in northern Afghanistan, he arrived in Merv to the court of the Umayyad governor of Khorasan, Asad ibn Abdallah al-Qasri, under whose influence he became a Muslim and served the governor till his death. He was the founder of the Samanid dynasty)
	Asad ibn Saman Persian: اسد بن سامان‎‎
	Nuh ibn Asad Persian: نوح بن اسد‎‎ 819–841/2	Ahmad ibn Asad Persian: احمد بن اسد‎‎ 819–864/5	Yahya ibn Asad Persian: یحییٰ بن اسد‎‎ 819–855	Ilyas ibn Asad Persian: الیاس بن اسد‎‎ 819–856
	Ahmad ibn Asad Persian: احمد بن اسد‎‎ 819–864/5			Ibrahim ibn Ilyas Persian: ابراهیم بن الیاس‎‎ 856–867
Abu Ibrahim Isma'il ibn Ahmad Persian: ابو ابراهیم اسماعیل بن احمد‎‎ 892–907	Nasr I Persian: نصر بن احمد‎‎ 864–892		Ya'qub ibn Ahmad Persian: یعقوب بن احمد‎‎ ?	Tahirids
Abu Ibrahim Isma'il ibn Ahmad Persian: ابو ابراهیم اسماعیل بن احمد‎‎ 892–907
Ahmad ibn Isma'il Persian: احمد بن اسماعیل‎‎ 907–914
Nasr II Persian: ابوالحسن نصر بن احمد‎‎ 914–943
Nuh I Persian: نوح بن نصر‎‎ 943–954
Ibrahim ibn Ahmad Persian: ابراهیم بن احمد‎‎ 947
Abd al-Malik ibn Nuh I Persian: عبدالملک بن نوح‎‎ 954–961
Abu Salih Mansur ibn Nuh I Persian: ابو صالح منصور بن نوح‎‎ 961–976
Nuh ibn Mansur Persian: نوح بن منصور‎‎ 976–997
Abd al-Aziz Persian: عبدالعزیز‎‎ 992
Abu'l-Harith Mansur ibn Nuh II Persian: ابو الحارث منصور بن نوح‎‎ 997–999
Abd al-Malik ibn Nuh II Persian: عبدالمالک بن نوح‎‎ 999
Isma'il Muntasir ibn Nuh II

 

Ya'qub ibn Layth یعقوب بن اللیث	861-879 CE
Amir أمیر	Amr ibn al-Layth عمرو بن اللیث	879-901 CE
Amir أمیر Abul-Hasan أبو الحسن	Tahir ibn Muhammad ibn Amr طاھر بن محمد بن عمرو co-ruler Ya'qub ibn Muhammad ibn Amr	901-908 CE
Amir أمیر	al-Layth ibn 'Ali اللیث بن علي	908-910 CE
Amir أمیر	Muhammad ibn 'Ali محمد بن علي	910-911 CE
Amir أمیر	Al-Mu'addal ibn 'Ali المعضل ابن علي	911 CE
Amir أمیر Abu Hafs ابو حفص	Amr ibn Ya'qub ibn Muhammad ibn Amr عمرو بن یعقوب بن محمد بن عمرو	912-913 CE
Samanid occupation 913-922 CE.
Amir أمیر Abu Ja'far ابو جعفر	Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Khalaf ibn Layth ibn 'Ali	922-963 CE
Amir أمیر Wali-ud-Daulah ولي الدولة	Khalaf ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalaf ibn al-Layth ibn 'Ali

• Imad al-Dawla (934–949)
• 'Adud al-Dawla (949–983)
• Sharaf al-Dawla (983–989)
• Samsam al-Dawla (989–998)
• Baha' al-Dawla (998–1012)
• Sultan al-Dawla (1012–1024)
• Abu Kalijar (1024–1048)
• Abu Mansur Fulad Sutun (1048–1051)
• Abu Sa'd Khusrau Shah (1051–1054)
• Abu Mansur Fulad Sutun (1051–1062)

 

Buyid era art: Painted, incised, and glazed earthenware. Dated 10th century, Iran. New York Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Buyids in Ray

• Rukn al-Dawla (935–976)
• Fakhr al-Dawla (976–980)
• Mu'ayyad al-Dawla (980–983)
• Fakhr al-Dawla (restored) (984–997)
• Majd al-Dawla (997–1029)

Buyids in Iraq

• Mu'izz al-Dawla (945–967)
• 'Izz al-Dawla (966–978)
• 'Adud al-Dawla (978–983)
• Samsam al-Dawla (983–987)
• Sharaf al-Dawla (987–989)
• Baha' al-Dawla (989–1012)
• Sultan al-Dawla (1012–1021)
• Musharrif al-Dawla (1021–1025)
• Jalal al-Dawla (1025–1044)
• Abu Kalijar (1044–1048)
• Al-Malik al-Rahim (1048–1055)

 

 

So where are your Abu Bakr, Omar and Khalids ??

 

The proof is the Hundreds of afghan tajiks I know who have names like umar and abu bakr, tajiks are persians as well. 

[Deucalion]

13 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

They have something with invading Iran and turning it muslim. And yet the Iranians don't name the guns and bombs after them. Why ? Coz they have pride. You guys name your guns and bombs after the very same people who raped and pillaged your ancestors. Why ? because you guys got no pride.

 

PS: Most Indian muslims are muslims because : 
a) Rape, pillage etc. Which is why areas where muslims did not rule directly (e.g.: orissa, Chattisgarh, Assam, etc) there are hardly any muslims. 

b) Dhimmi tax. 

 

13 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

 

 

2. If most Indian muslims are not a result of rapes and pillages, explain to us why areas of India where muslims did not rule directly, such as Orissa, Assam, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, etc. have <5% muslims. 

I hope every Indian muslim should know this including the ICFers, Mods etc . you are really doing a charity work for ICF.

 

[Deucalion]

13 hours ago, panther said:

The proof is the Hundreds of afghan tajiks I know who have names like umar and abu bakr, tajiks are persians as well. 

dont burst the bubble. his knowledge and thoughts are remarkable regarding Indian muslims. 

[Malcolm Merlyn]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

They have something with invading Iran and turning it muslim. And yet the Iranians don't name the guns and bombs after them. Why ? Coz they have pride. You guys name your guns and bombs after the very same people who raped and pillaged your ancestors. Why ? because you guys got no pride.

 

PS: Most Indian muslims are muslims because : 
a) Rape, pillage etc. Which is why areas where muslims did not rule directly (e.g.: orissa, Chattisgarh, Assam, etc) there are hardly any muslims. 

b) Dhimmi tax. 

 

Persians had a rich history even before they were invaded by Muslim armies and that history is well known.Persians have no issue accepting their non muslim past and they are very proud of it.Same with Indonesians.

 

Pakistanis too had a rich history before that area was invaded by muslims.But if the Pakistani accept that history then they will have to acknowledge that they were Hindus once and converted under duress or due to greed.Except a minor portion that was converted due to sufi influence.

 

Now if they accept all this how will they spread propoganda about "Hindoo" India vs "Muslim"Pakistan. How Hindoos are weak and Pakistani superrrmaan.How will they claim that 1 Pakistani soldier is equal to 10 Hindu Indian soldier?

 

So they try claiming history of Arabs,Persians,Afghans etc. None of whom were indigenious to the present day Pakistanis.Pakistanis get treated as filth by the Arabs.The Afghans arent too fond of them either.Iranians have over the years had better relations with India.

[jalebi_bhai]

17 hours ago, randomGuy said:

These are people who name their missiles after those who invaded their land and persecuted them. 

 

Pakistan has standards only in chori, makkari, selfishness, delusion and ignorance.

 

They know that their land has no value and no takers , so they give it for apparently for less money. China is also happy as it can sustain a bankrupt Pakistani economy so that Pakistan sustain hostility with India as per Chinese'plan' to 'contain' India.

It is quite the opposite sirji. The lands of Punjab and Sindh are very fertile, one of the main reasons why they drove out Hindus and Sikhs from these parts during the partition.

They also hold a very key location in a geopolitical sense. Most of the viable land trade routes from East Asia to Central and West Asia go through Pakistan. Their proximity to India, China, Iran, Russia and Afghanistan makes them a useful geopolitical tool. Without Pakistan, the US are hopeless in Afghanistan.

[panther]

15 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

Persians had a rich history even before they were invaded by Muslim armies and that history is well known.Persians have no issue accepting their non muslim past and they are very proud of it.Same with Indonesians.

 

Pakistanis too had a rich history before that area was invaded by muslims.But if the Pakistani accept that history then they will have to acknowledge that they were Hindus once and converted under duress or due to greed.Except a minor portion that was converted due to sufi influence.

 

Now if they accept all this how will they spread propoganda about "Hindoo" India vs "Muslim"Pakistan. How Hindoos are weak and Pakistani superrrmaan.How will they claim that 1 Pakistani soldier is equal to 10 Hindu Indian soldier?

 

So they try claiming history of Arabs,Persians,Afghans etc. None of whom were indigenious to the present day Pakistanis.Pakistanis get treated as filth by the Arabs.The Afghans arent too fond of them either.Iranians have over the years had better relations with India.

you should preach the same to your Indian brothers, So many of them have names like sayyed, pathan, mughal,sheikh,khan, mirza, baig lol. 

 

It is true that many Muslims on this side especially Muhajirs have the above names which they adopted after partion but it is the same on your side as well. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by panther

[jalebi_bhai]

1 hour ago, panther said:

Well i googled that and Jharkhand has 15% muslim population.

7 minutes ago, panther said:

you should preach the same to your Indian brothers, So many of them have names like sayyed, pathan, mughal,sheikh,khan, mirza, baig lol. 

 

It is true that many Muslims on this side especially Muhajirs have the above names which they adopted after partion but it is the same on your side as well. 

Slightly off topic but if you don't mind telling me, what connection does Ahmed Shah Abdali have with Pakistan?

Edited November 30, 2016 by jalebi_bhai

[panther]

Just now, jalebi_bhai said:

Slightly off topic but if you don't mind telling me, what connection does Ahmed Shah Abdali have with Pakistan?

He ruled over it for some time. 

 

[jalebi_bhai]

10 minutes ago, panther said:

He ruled over it for some time. 

 

Oh really?  . Pakistan did not exist in the 18th century. 

 

Abdali was an Afghan. No connection with Pakistan.

[panther]

Just now, jalebi_bhai said:

Oh really?  . Pakistan did not exist in the 18th century. 

 

Abdali was an Afghan. No connection with Pakistan.

Yh that's pretty obvious, there are tens of thousands of abdalis(durranis) in pakistan. 

 

 

 

[Malcolm Merlyn]

you should preach the same to your Indian brothers, So many of them have names like sayyed, pathan, mughal,sheikh,khan, mirza, baig lol. 

 

It is true that many Muslims on this side especially Muhajirs have the above names which they adopted after partion but it is the same on your side as well. 

There may be people of such ancestry in India and some in Pakistan.Thats individual issue.

Never seen any country borrowing heroes from other countries like Ghauri Abdali etc.

[panther]

3 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

There may be people of such ancestry in India and some in Pakistan.Thats individual issue.

Never seen any country borrowing heroes from other countries like Ghauri Abdali etc.

That's because they are a minority in your country if they were majority they would have roads after aurangzeb and missiles after Bin qasim.

 

 

[narenpande1]

Truth continued....No.4

FOR THE EDUCATED PAKISTANIS that are fed lies and propagnada:

 

4) Pakistan was founded on the principals that muslim Pak  must be equal to Hindu India, Pak wants to have parity in every sense.

 

Pakistan has never come to terms with the fact that India is many times its size in every sense. The much larger country will always dominate.

That is the nature of the game. But Pakistan feels its creation will fail its cause if the subcontinent is mostly ALL about India.

Pakistan cries and bemoans that  "aggressive" India has a defence budget 7 times that of Pakistan. But Pak never realizes that India is 11 times the bigger economy. Pak never realizes that its military scope may all be about India, but that India needs a much bigger defense for deterrence

against an aggressive, expansionist and rogue China that has now started claiming water bodies as well.

 

Pak must realize that it has NO FUTURE in confrontation with India, which is the sole cause of its sad existence.

Pak falsely thinks that having nuclear weapons is a guarantee to its sovereignty . It does not have the common sense to realize that Soviet Union which was 1000 times more armed than Pak ( nuclear or othersie)  disintegrated to many countries in an arms race with US.

 

Jinnah made remarks that India and pakistan should be like US and Canada. Don't Pakistani intellectuals understand that US dominiates North America because it is much bigger than Canada economically, militarily and population wise. Ditto for Germany and France being dominant in Europe over say Belgium or Netherlands. Pakistan must shed its brainless complex and accept that India will always be much much bigger in every conceivable measure of comprehensive national power vs. Pak.

 

Not realizing this and trying to compete with India is the reason for the state Pakistan finds itself in right now.

 

[jalebi_bhai]

27 minutes ago, panther said:

Yh that's pretty obvious, there are tens of thousands of abdalis(durranis) in pakistan. 

 

 

 

Pakhtun migrants from Afghanistan.  

[Muloghonto]

2 hours ago, panther said:

The proof is the Hundreds of afghan tajiks I know who have names like umar and abu bakr, tajiks are persians as well. 

Afghans and Tajiks are not Persians. They are Farsi speaking Indo-Europeans. 

Afghans have a tendency to overlook their own history and associate with conquerors as well, which is why there are so many Khans amongst Pashtuns, yet not a SINGLE pashtun tribe is Turkic or Mongol, where the word 'Khan' originates from.

 

As i said,find a single Afghan 'khan' before your masters from central Asia showed up and enslaved you. You won't find any.

[panther]

Just now, jalebi_bhai said:

Pakhtun migrants from Afghanistan.  

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

[Muloghonto]

2 hours ago, panther said:

Well i googled that and Jharkhand has 15% muslim population.

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 ?

 

[panther]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

Afghans and Tajiks are not Persians. They are Farsi speaking Indo-Europeans. 

Afghans have a tendency to overlook their own history and associate with conquerors as well, which is why there are so many Khans amongst Pashtuns, yet not a SINGLE pashtun tribe is Turkic or Mongol, where the word 'Khan' originates from.

 

As i said,find a single Afghan 'khan' before your masters from central Asia showed up and enslaved you. You won't find any.

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.