Jump to content
Global.Baba

Ayodhya Verdict

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dial_100 said:

Very immature approach from the other community. Ram mandir should have been built 50-60 years ago.

Yes, when Somnath Templle was re-built. Secularism/Nehruvinism is bane of India, we should have de-colonized in 1947, but we have now western-educated colonial apologists still arguing about the evils of Hinduism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, coffee_rules said:

Yes, when Somnath Templle was re-built. Secularism/Nehruvinism is bane of India, we should have de-colonized in 1947, but we have now western-educated colonial apologists still arguing about the evils of Hinduism. 

How about the ones getting practical education by spending a few days in a Ashram or traveling on motorcycles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

How about the ones getting practical education by spending a few days in a Ashram or traveling on motorcycles?

Motorcycle dairies! Is that a left-liberal way of thought!

Edited by coffee_rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dial_100 said:

Very immature approach from the other community. Ram mandir should have been built 50-60 years ago.

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

which is why, SC should delay, dismiss, delay etc. There are no practical benefits to this and only practical badness. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

They would go like Krishnabhoomi, where the birth olace is right under a mosque, they will decide to build a ram temple  and a mosque in the complex. Hindus will grudgingly tolerate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

I aint ardent hindu, actually i dont consider myself one but I am definitely Ram bhakt to the core. The highlighted parts suggest that waqf board is only fighting it for the heck of it. This very attitude best accounts for the ayodhya issue. WB is trying to spread this fear in the minds of common muslims is pure politics and their religious agenda. What surprises me that even educated lot falls trap to this propaganda. With this attitude of wb, nobody from the community feels awkward or doesnt want to leave the country and doesnt feel that wb's behavior portray intolerance.  Even elites of the community are silent spectators. 

 

very immature madamji. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Singh bling said:

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

There are hideous efforts to involve western chut*iya indologists who have tried to white-wash the moghul crimes. There is vigorous effort to revise Islam conquests in India using such Indologists like Richard Eaton who says some 80 temples were only destroyed and not like 50000+ like Hindus claim!

 

https://thedebateinitiative.com/2016/01/11/the-myth-of-destroyed-hindu-temples-and-forced-conversion-of-hindus-by-historical-muslim-rulers-of-india/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dial_100 said:

I aint ardent hindu, actually i dont consider myself one but I am definitely Ram bhakt to the core. The highlighted parts suggest that waqf board is only fighting it for the heck of it. This very attitude best accounts for the ayodhya issue. WB is trying to spread this fear in the minds of common muslims is pure politics and their religious agenda. What surprises me that even educated lot falls trap to this propaganda. With this attitude of wb, nobody from the community feels awkward or doesnt want to leave the country and doesnt feel that wb's behavior portray intolerance.  Even elites of the community are silent spectators. 

 

very immature madamji. 

wb has no argument in this case. They were only pressurized by Commie historians from AMU/JNU and some western Indologists like Sheldon Pollock to fight a case of Babri being on vacant land. There is enough historical evidence to prove there was a temple there and hence the Allahabad HC judgement was kind of In favor of Hindus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Singh bling said:

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

The so called 'representatives' of the Muslim community not only accept that there were atrocities, but some of them tend to gloat over it too. It is sickening.  But what has that to do with the verdict? Which 'representative' has a case going on wrt Babri Masjid/ lord Ram Janmabhoomi issue?

Who exactly is a Muslim community representative? For integration into the mainstream it s necessary that people have representatives on the basis of the work they do and not on the basis of their religious affiliation.

11 hours ago, dial_100 said:

I aint ardent hindu, actually i dont consider myself one but I am definitely Ram bhakt to the core. The highlighted parts suggest that waqf board is only fighting it for the heck of it. This very attitude best accounts for the ayodhya issue. WB is trying to spread this fear in the minds of common muslims is pure politics and their religious agenda. What surprises me that even educated lot falls trap to this propaganda. With this attitude of wb, nobody from the community feels awkward or doesnt want to leave the country and doesnt feel that wb's behavior portray intolerance.  Even elites of the community are silent spectators. 

 

very immature madamji. 

Sir, you may call me all the names that you wish to. But some basic premises about this case.

1-The Waqf board is doing what is kind of its stated job. It is the precise reason that the state governments has instituted this board on the basis of the Waqf Act.. To regulate and maintain Waqf property issues both movable and immovable. Of course, you can pose the question: should they be taking the fight to the Supreme Court? Ideally not. Give up all claim. But they are well within their rights to fight it out. 

2-Waqf board is not spreading fear/hatred in the minds of common Muslims. If anything, the act of demolition of the Masjid did that. Since we are on this topic, the massive political gain because of the Babri Masjid demolition was for the BJP. And that too can be a cause of fear. 

3-Waqf board's case is basically that of a title deed. The Waqf board or its predecessor organization has not changed the status quo. Their case so far has been to challenge the changes in status quo.

4- Every action of the Waqf board has been completely constitutional. Yet you choose to vilify them, of all people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

wb has no argument in this case. They were only pressurized by Commie historians from AMU/JNU and some western Indologists like Sheldon Pollock to fight a case of Babri being on vacant land. There is enough historical evidence to prove there was a temple there and hence the Allahabad HC judgement was kind of In favor of Hindus. 

IIRC, Waqf and/or its predecessor has filed various cases over ownership of the plot in the Faizabad District court right from the 1950s. Most of these cases are still languishing in those courts. I think these cases predate what AMU/JNU or commie historians as you put it have said on the issue.

And its not just the Waqf Board which has insisted that the case be taken to the SC. Even the Hindu Mahasabha has done the same.

 

This a long drawn case, the dynamics of which have vastly changed after the demolition of the Masjid. It isn't as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mariyam said:

IIRC, Waqf and/or its predecessor has filed various cases over ownership of the plot in the Faizabad District court right from the 1950s. Most of these cases are still languishing in those courts. I think these cases predate what AMU/JNU or commie historians as you put it have said on the issue.

And its not just the Waqf Board which has insisted that the case be taken to the SC. Even the Hindu Mahasabha has done the same.

 

This a long drawn case, the dynamics of which have vastly changed after the demolition of the Masjid. It isn't as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

You should read Meenakshi Jain book on this subject. The Historical evidence I speak about is from 1870 onwards. British, FWIW, have maintained civic records on this site, has been extensively used in the Prayagraj HC verdict of 2010.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mariyam said:

The so called 'representatives' of the Muslim community not only accept that there were atrocities, but some of them tend to gloat over it too. It is sickening.  But what has that to do with the verdict? Which 'representative' has a case going on wrt Babri Masjid/ lord Ram Janmabhoomi issue?

Who exactly is a Muslim community representative? For integration into the mainstream it s necessary that people have representatives on the basis of the work they do and not on the basis of their religious affiliation.

Sir, you may call me all the names that you wish to. But some basic premises about this case.

1-The Waqf board is doing what is kind of its stated job. It is the precise reason that the state governments has instituted this board on the basis of the Waqf Act.. To regulate and maintain Waqf property issues both movable and immovable. Of course, you can pose the question: should they be taking the fight to the Supreme Court? Ideally not. Give up all claim. But they are well within their rights to fight it out. 

2-Waqf board is not spreading fear/hatred in the minds of common Muslims. If anything, the act of demolition of the Masjid did that. Since we are on this topic, the massive political gain because of the Babri Masjid demolition was for the BJP. And that too can be a cause of fear. 

3-Waqf board's case is basically that of a title deed. The Waqf board or its predecessor organization has not changed the status quo. Their case so far has been to challenge the changes in status quo.

4- Every action of the Waqf board has been completely constitutional. Yet you choose to vilify them, of all people.

Please accept my apology. It was definitely not personal and i vented out in frustration. I mean only good. Can I ask you something?

 

Am I being foolish to expect magnanimous gesture from fellow men?. What happened in 92 could not be held against the very essense the place can offer to Ram devotees. Ram belongs to all. Nobody has a copy right. Certainly not BJP or RSS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

You should read Meenakshi Jain book on this subject. The Historical evidence I speak about is from 1870 onwards. British, FWIW, have maintained civic records on this site, has been extensively used in the Prayagraj HC verdict of 2010.

 

Those who meditate can easily tell that it is the true birthplace. They can even pin point the spot. Chaitanya can be easily felt from here in America also. 

 

It is unfortunate. If ordinance is the only way then so be it. As long as Hindu community generously offers better option for Muslims to build a big mosque somewhere else then it will serve 2 purposes.  

 

India can set a new precedence of harmonious settlement between communities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dial_100 said:

Those who meditate can easily tell that it is the true birthplace. They can even pin point the spot. Chaitanya can be easily felt from here in America also. 

Yeah. I call 100% pure bakwaas on that. There is no way to scientifically confirm this, in the first place. Neither is there a way to keep the test subjects from colluding in said matter. 

3 minutes ago, dial_100 said:

 

It is unfortunate. If ordinance is the only way then so be it. As long as Hindu community generously offers better option for Muslims to build a big mosque somewhere else then it will serve 2 purposes.  

I think thats a good compromise. Perhaps one close by would be nice. 

3 minutes ago, dial_100 said:

 

India can set a new precedence of harmonious settlement between communities.

Hope so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, dial_100 said:

Please accept my apology. It was definitely not personal and i vented out in frustration. I mean only good. Can I ask you something?

 

Am I being foolish to expect magnanimous gesture from fellow men?. What happened in 92 could not be held against the very essense the place can offer to Ram devotees. Ram belongs to all. Nobody has a copy right. Certainly not BJP or RSS. 

Not foolish, but idealistic.

 

Ideally, the Waqf board should just have relinquished all claim to that spot and built a mosque on land maybe a few kms from the lord Ram janmabhoomi. But given the boards' (pre demolition) unnecessary stubborn attitude , we have missed that bus. It would have been a very good example of reconciliation.

But to expect Waqf board to not fight it now, after the demolition is very naive. Backing down now would look very cowardly on their part. I don't see them backing out at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

You should read Meenakshi Jain book on this subject. The Historical evidence I speak about is from 1870 onwards. British, FWIW, have maintained civic records on this site, has been extensively used in the Prayagraj HC verdict of 2010.

 

Riddle me this:

If the evidence is so overwhelmingly in favour of the existence and subsequent destruction of a Ram Mandir on that spot: Why did the Allahabad/Prayagraj HC grant 1/3rd of the land of the Waqf board? 

 

PS: Can you share a link to this book?

 

PPS: The best outcome here is an out of court settlement. With the Mandir at that spot and land granted for a Masjid somewhere in the general vicinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Riddle me this:

If the evidence is so overwhelmingly in favour of the existence and subsequent destruction of a Ram Mandir on that spot: Why did the Allahabad/Prayagraj HC grant 1/3rd of the land of the Waqf board? 

 

PS: Can you share a link to this book?

 

PPS: The best outcome here is an out of court settlement. With the Mandir at that spot and land granted for a Masjid somewhere in the general vicinity.

Why in the vicinity? SC has ruled that mosque is not essential to Islam. Let them build a grand mosque in Lucknow. A lot of hindus will contribute. Shia board recommended this. Don't  have to rub it like Mathura and Gyaan wapi in Kashi.

 

The book: 

The Battle of Rama: Case of the Temple at Ayodhya

https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-att-aio-us&q=The+Battle+of+Rama:+Case+of+the+Temple+at+Ayodhya&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAONgFuLWz9U3MDTKSCtOqVLi1U_XNzRMMyg0LcxLL9IScCwtycgvCsl3ys_P9s_LqQQABVS1mTAAAAA&sa=X&sqi=2&pjf=1&ved=2ahUKEwj9tMvByrDeAhWlg-AKHfaMAfIQri4wA3oECAsQDQ&biw=320&bih=510

 

Edited by coffee_rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On topic,

 

The court of this country continues to be a joke. They have time for midnight court sessions for urban naxals but not for issues that matter to actual people.  All judges come from 2-300 families, all from the brown sahib class.

 

Patience among the people is growing thin ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Verdict or no verdict, I'd like to see a compromise being reached on this long-drawn out mess -

  • Build a temple at the spot.  There's ample evidence to support that local hindus have believed for millenia that this was a temple site of significance.  Whether Ram existed or not, whether he was born there or not.
  • Provide massively generous compensation to the Waqf board to build a mosque and have plenty left over.
  • Any, and I mean any, entities involved with the masjid demolition in 1992 to be absolutely debarred from any involvement whatsoever from the temple - construction or administration.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

How weak must Hindus be that when they are 80% they still tip toe around the 14% Muslim community.

 

That too after Muslims demanded a separate country. I think the day Pakistan was created things like this should have become a non entity.

Paaji, the blame goes to Gandhian brainwashing. Even from childhood I remember being brainwashed about how much we owe our lives to GAndhi (and Nehru)   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moochad said:

Paaji, the blame goes to Gandhian brainwashing. Even from childhood I remember being brainwashed about how much we owe our lives to GAndhi (and Nehru)   

Yes I agree. Gandhi is not a good role model.

 

Anyone who say to turn the other cheek only wants to breed weak followers who are easier to control and manipulate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2018 at 6:57 PM, Singh bling said:

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

The attrocities by Muslims were horrible when Mughals invaded India.The Maratha ,Sikh and Rajputs did take revenge in self defense which was important.Was there even a noise by the Mughas and their people when thousand temples where being  destroyed by Mughals in India and mosques were built over temples with material of destroyed temples being used to build those mosques.The Muslims in India are probably enjoying better life and respect than they get in Somalia,Egypt,Libya,Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

See the number of people dying in those Muslim countries due to conflict by their own rulers even today as well as wars involving US since 2000.India is very safe for tose who are moving here.Rohingyas too tried to move to India as they thought they could live better life here.Some must be feeling lucky they moved out of those countries to other safer countries.Think educated Muslims are migrating their kids to safer developed or peaceful developing nations so they do not face same fate as others facing now.

 

Yes,atrocities were committed against Muslims elsewhere.One can google atrocities against Muslims.There is vast list of that.Doesnt means they should be pampere because they did provoke Indian kings like Shivaji,The Rajputs and Vijaynagar empire by destroying temples and committing cruel acts on civilians and got some of it back.Now the Muslims are fighting among themselves and lot of lives are lost as result.Example Egypt,Libya,Afghan,Pak and terrorism in other such countries by terrorist or rulers.

Edited by Straight Drive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ranvir said:

Yes I agree. Gandhi is not a good role model.

 

Anyone who say to turn the other cheek only wants to breed weak followers who are easier to control and manipulate.

Exactly. When one has to deal with those  who have flashed swords in India we needed Rajput Kings,Shivaji Maharaja,Vijayanagar Empire.Gandhis won't work against such cruel people.A sword should be used to tackle a sword.Peaceful talks are good with people who are educated,shown progressive human behaviour and are not willing to commit atrocities against other religions or show respect to others religions.Gandhigiri won't work against swords.For dealing such cruelty we needed various Indian kings and now the attitude we saw during Kargil,The surgical strike and what US army did in Afghanistan and Pakistan.Otherwise the past history would get repeated over centuries.Deal it in tough way and strike it when it is trying to bud and before they manage to spread terrorism.

Edited by Straight Drive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Straight Drive said:

The attrocities by Muslims were horrible when Mughals invaded India.The Maratha ,Sikh and Rajputs did take revenge in self defense which was important.Was there even a noise by the Mughas and their people when thousand temples where being  destroyed by Mughals in India and mosques were built over temples with material of destroyed temples being used to build those mosques.The Muslims in India are probably enjoying better life and respect than they get in Somalia,Egypt,Libya,Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

See the number of people dying in those Muslim countries due to conflict by their own rulers even today as well as wars involving US since 2000.India is very safe for tose who are moving here.Rohingyas too tried to move to India as they thought they could live better life here.Some must be feeling lucky they moved out of those countries to other safer countries.Think educated Muslims are migrating their kids to safer developed or peaceful developing nations so they do not face same fate as others facing now.

 

Yes,atrocities were committed against Muslims elsewhere.One can google atrocities against Muslims.There is vast list of that.Doesnt means they should be pampere because they did provoke Indian kings like Shivaji,The Rajputs and Vijaynagar empire by destroying temples and committing cruel acts on civilians and got some of it back.Now the Muslims are fighting among themselves and lot of lives are lost as result.Example Egypt,Libya,Afghan,Pak and terrorism in other such countries by terrorist or rulers.

This bit, that muslims 'provoked' Shivaji or the Rajputs or Vijayanagar by committing attrocities against the Hindus, is total revisionist history nonsense, not supported by ANY first hand sources of history to exist.


This is simply because, we are NOT talking about nationalists or rulers of a NATION. This is the Maratha King, *NOT* King of England or Emperor of Japan of the last 500 years. These were ALL upper-class lordlings, fighting for *THEIR* Jaagirs and their personal domains. 

As such, they fought the Mughals, the same way ANY ruler fights their rivals or overlords - just like the muslims rulers of Bahmani Sultanate or the Nizams - they sense an opportunity and rebel to seize the moment. Some die in failure, some succeed. 

Look up Bargi raids. This is Marathas raping, killing and looting  villages in Bihar, Bengal and Orissa. We Bongs still have folk song about the terror of the Maratha bargi raids. All done on predominantly hindu civillians (especially in Orissa, where muslim presence is like negligible). 

 

These 'heroes' of yours are heroes of the feudal era - meaning, they only care for their jaagir, fiefs and ability to conquer as much land for themselves as they can. Thats it. The concept of 'nation' does not exist back then, neither do they give two hoots about the people of 'their nation' - only the people living inside their jaagirs matter, since thats how they gain power and wealth- by keeping the people in their jaagirs fed & prosperous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Straight Drive said:

Exactly. When one has to deal with those  who have flashed swords in India we needed Rajput Kings,Shivaji Maharaja,Vijayanagar Empire.Gandhis won't work against such cruel people.

Um, you don't want to go down this route, trust me. India got genocided by the Turko-Muslims predominantly BECAUSE the Rajputs were so bloody incompetent AND defiant of their military superiors. There is no glory in foolish resistance, especially one meted out by incompetence. 

Better to live in servitude and get to live, than die like a fool. Look at the Jews today - they are one of the elite communities of this time, because Jews learnt their lessons: once they got utterly crushed by the Romans, they stayed quiet, put up with discrimination for 2000 years and waited. 
Now look at the Carthaginians - mighty empire that got beaten fair and square by Rome, still was too proud and too foolish to submit after THREE war campaigns and 50 years. Result: Every Carthaginian killed, Carthaginian lands sowed with salt and Carthage being a ruin for 200 years before rising again as a Roman-populated town in early empire period. 

Quote

A sword should be used to tackle a sword.Peaceful talks are good with people who are educated,shown progressive human behaviour and are not willing to commit atrocities against other religions or show respect to others religions.Gandhigiri won't work against swords.For dealing such cruelty we needed various Indian kings and now the attitude we saw during Kargil,The surgical strike and what US army did in Afghanistan and Pakistan.Otherwise the past history would get repeated over centuries.Deal it in tough way and strike it when it is trying to bud and before they manage to spread terrorism.

Gandhigiri does work and is the best option, when your sword is too weak and your leaders too foolish. If you read the battle-accounts of battles such as Khanwa, Kabul, etc. it becomes pretty apparent that your vaunted Maharanas were total idiots as far as tactical awareness on battle-field goes and total FAILS in terms of strategy.

 

To be fair though, the total tactical  & strategic fail is a uniquely medival Indian phenomenon, where regardless of Hindu or Muslim, most of its generals fought like total idiots on the battlefield. 

You may've heard great legends of how valiantly Rana Sanga fought at Khanwa. But if you ACTUALLY READ what transpired, it becomes evidently clear that Rana Sanga was a total idiot strategically as well as tactically. So was Hemu- atleast, strategically. 

 

Maybe if you were a bit educated in history and read what strategically competent generals of past times - such as Julius Caesar, Pompey Magnus, Lucius Sulla, Cao Cao, Nurhachi or Wang Mang, etc. do, you'd realize, why Hemu, Sanga, etc. were total f-king idiots.

 

 

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Um, you don't want to go down this route, trust me. India got genocided by the Turko-Muslims predominantly BECAUSE the Rajputs were so bloody incompetent AND defiant of their military superiors. There is no glory in foolish resistance, especially one meted out by incompetence. 

Better to live in servitude and get to live, than die like a fool. Look at the Jews today - they are one of the elite communities of this time, because Jews learnt their lessons: once they got utterly crushed by the Romans, they stayed quiet, put up with discrimination for 2000 years and waited. 
Now look at the Carthaginians - mighty empire that got beaten fair and square by Rome, still was too proud and too foolish to submit after THREE war campaigns and 50 years. Result: Every Carthaginian killed, Carthaginian lands sowed with salt and Carthage being a ruin for 200 years before rising again as a Roman-populated town in early empire period. 

Gandhigiri does work and is the best option, when your sword is too weak and your leaders too foolish. If you read the battle-accounts of battles such as Khanwa, Kabul, etc. it becomes pretty apparent that your vaunted Maharanas were total idiots as far as tactical awareness on battle-field goes and total FAILS in terms of strategy.

 

To be fair though, the total tactical  & strategic fail is a uniquely medival Indian phenomenon, where regardless of Hindu or Muslim, most of its generals fought like total idiots on the battlefield. 

You may've heard great legends of how valiantly Rana Sanga fought at Khanwa. But if you ACTUALLY READ what transpired, it becomes evidently clear that Rana Sanga was a total idiot strategically as well as tactically. So was Hemu- atleast, strategically. 

 

Maybe if you were a bit educated in history and read what strategically competent generals of past times - such as Julius Caesar, Pompey Magnus, Lucius Sulla, Cao Cao, Nurhachi or Wang Mang, etc. do, you'd realize, why Hemu, Sanga, etc. were total f-king idiots.

 

 

Nobody in this world is going to try your approach of Gandhigiri when dealing with cruel people who come with swords and probably some weapons when fighting US or Coalition forces or Indian forces or the inter religion conflicts in middle east.Nobody tolerates terrorism today, every attempt is being made to crush it, not accept it.Gandhigiri is not a war tactics or a method to resolve a crisis where an environment is created like invasion or attacks over other countries.imo countries are aptly dealing with it.I differ on your view that Gandhigiri is the best way to resolve such issues.Terrorism has to be wiped out and its good to see the surgical strikes and US and coalition forces led war.Zero tolerance.

 

 

Edited by Straight Drive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

construct both temple and mosque .. or let muslims sponsor for the temple and Hindus for the mosque

 

people who visit sabarimala will visit a mosque or darga before visiting ayyappa .. muslims yet to mind ayyappa devotees visiting darga/mosque and hindus dont mind visiting it before going to ayyapan temple  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ranvir said:

How weak must Hindus be that when they are 80% they still tip toe around the 14% Muslim community.

 

That too after Muslims demanded a separate country. I think the day Pakistan was created things like this should have become a non entity.

Most Indians are brainwashed like velu

16 minutes ago, velu said:

construct both temple and mosque .. or let muslims sponsor for the temple and Hindus for the mosque

 

people who visit sabarimala will visit a mosque or darga before visiting ayyappa .. muslims yet to mind ayyappa devotees visiting darga/mosque and hindus dont mind visiting it before going to ayyapan temple  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, diga said:

Most Indians are brainwashed like velu

 

 

i visited madurai meenkahsi temple , mosque is there opposite to one of  the gopurams ..

same with sreerangam temple as well ... 

 

i dont have any problem having mosque near the temple ( most hindus dont mind as well i guess ) but it is muslims who always had issues with having temples

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, velu said:

 

i visited madurai meenkahsi temple , mosque is there opposite to one of  the gopurams ..

same with sreerangam temple as well ... 

 

i dont have any problem having mosque near the temple ( most hindus dont mind as well i guess ) but it is muslims who always had issues with having temples

There's a mosque known as Shahi Idgah  adjacent to Krishna Janmbhumi temple in Mathura. I guess something like that could be worked out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

There's a mosque known as Shahi Idgah  adjacent to Krishna Janmbhumi temple in Mathura. I guess something like that could be worked out. 

 

if we go through justice system ,  they will keep extending the case .. 

imho its better to settle between the parties through talk with non-negotiable ram temple at ramjenmabhumi ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After talking to the Indian Muslims, it seems they also fear that Ram Temple is only the beginning, and there are claims of dozens of more temples on the places which have mosques today. 

 

On 10/31/2018 at 2:26 PM, Moochad said:

Leaving this here

2le1x6.jpg

 

Yaar, religious people gather to fight and kill for religious places, but if atheists gather only in order to piss together, then you are pissed off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

After talking to the Indian Muslims, it seems they also fear that Ram Temple is only the beginning, and there are claims of dozens of more temples on the places which have mosques today. 

Yes, that is historical reality. I disagree with trying to flip it back to temples myself, though it does not change the fact that Islam has a long track record of converting other people's places of worship into mosques, both in the subcontinent and outside.

 

42 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

 

Yaar, religious people gather to fight and kill for religious places, but if atheists gather only in order to piss together, then you are pissed off. 

:laugh:.
He's just salty that we give such thoughts zero % of our daily brain or financial energies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Straight Drive said:

Nobody in this world is going to try your approach of Gandhigiri when dealing with cruel people who come with swords and probably some weapons when fighting US or Coalition forces or Indian forces or the inter religion conflicts in middle east.

Wrong. Many have capitulated and kept their identity alive. How the eff do you think Greeks still managed to be 90% Orthodox Greeks after being ruled for 650 years by the Ottomans ? Granted, they were not the most brutal of muslim rulers, especially towards conquered land that paid their taxes, but they were no different than Mughals that way: they too tried to convert (and did convert) mass amounts of their land holdings- the reason there are muslims in Albania or Bosnia is due to the Ottomans converting the Slavs & whatever the hell Albanians are. 

 

Yet, Greece capitulated and retained their culture, their orthodoxy and waited for nearly 600 years, before breaking away and re-starting their own journey. 

 

19 hours ago, Straight Drive said:

Nobody tolerates terrorism today, every attempt is being made to crush it, not accept it.Gandhigiri is not a war tactics or a method to resolve a crisis where an environment is created like invasion or attacks over other countries.imo countries are aptly dealing with it.I differ on your view that Gandhigiri is the best way to resolve such issues.Terrorism has to be wiped out and its good to see the surgical strikes and US and coalition forces led war.Zero tolerance.

And nobody is talking about modern day terrorism, either.  I talked about long ago invaders and their resistors. My point is, the Rajputs were stupid to resist. Stupid, because they were decisively inferior strategically and tactically to their opposition. 
If you face a cruel warlord, you better win. And if you are decisively inferior in tactics, its stupidity to fight.

 

Yes, you may say that there is no way Rana Sanga may've known that he was fighting a general (Babur) who KNEW how to fight on the field and not just a mindless battle-field meat-grinder butcher like he or his adversaries were. Sure. But it also means we should stop glorifying these IDIOTS as valiants. Valor is not a lamb not knowing when to run the heck away from a tiger. That is stupidity. And stupidity from a warrior who could've saved his people by capitulating instead of eliciting wanton slaughter by losing and leaving his people defenceless. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

And nobody is talking about modern day terrorism, either.  I talked about long ago invaders and their resistors. My point is, the Rajputs were stupid to resist. Stupid, because they were decisively inferior strategically and tactically to their opposition. 
If you face a cruel warlord, you better win. And if you are decisively inferior in tactics, its stupidity to fight.

How are you so sure that there was no diplomacy? There are plenty of examples of inter marriage,diplomatic exchanges and peace treaties among Rajputs and Mughals.

 

Sometimes there is no other option but to stand up and fight even a losing battle

 

Hindu culture is based on fair fight. On honor and ethics which a lot of these barbaric cultures lacked. They fought dirty. That is not some great strategy.

 

 

Edited by Global.Baba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Wrong. Many have capitulated and kept their identity alive. How the eff do you think Greeks still managed to be 90% Orthodox Greeks after being ruled for 650 years by the Ottomans ? Granted, they were not the most brutal of muslim rulers, especially towards conquered land that paid their taxes, but they were no different than Mughals that way: they too tried to convert (and did convert) mass amounts of their land holdings- the reason there are muslims in Albania or Bosnia is due to the Ottomans converting the Slavs & whatever the hell Albanians are. 

 

Yet, Greece capitulated and retained their culture, their orthodoxy and waited for nearly 600 years, before breaking away and re-starting their own journey. 

 

And nobody is talking about modern day terrorism, either.  I talked about long ago invaders and their resistors. My point is, the Rajputs were stupid to resist. Stupid, because they were decisively inferior strategically and tactically to their opposition. 
If you face a cruel warlord, you better win. And if you are decisively inferior in tactics, its stupidity to fight.

 

Yes, you may say that there is no way Rana Sanga may've known that he was fighting a general (Babur) who KNEW how to fight on the field and not just a mindless battle-field meat-grinder butcher like he or his adversaries were. Sure. But it also means we should stop glorifying these IDIOTS as valiants. Valor is not a lamb not knowing when to run the heck away from a tiger. That is stupidity. And stupidity from a warrior who could've saved his people by capitulating instead of eliciting wanton slaughter by losing and leaving his people defenceless. 

 

Disagree that those  who defended India during terrifying invasions were stupid. Agree to disagree on the differences of opinion though on this issue and I leave it at that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...