kira Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said: thats actually call dodging the question. The question was already answered by another person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, kira said: The question was already answered by another person i didnt asked the question to another person, i asked the question from you ? so care to explain ? Edited October 10, 2017 by KeyboardWarrior Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kira Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Just now, KeyboardWarrior said: i didnt asked the question to another person, i asked the question from you ? so care to explain ? Now this is called dodging the answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Just now, kira said: Now this is called dodging the answer what ? no its not. he interfer in our talk, but i gve him the reply. so wheres the dodging ? so i asked you again the same question. care to explain ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kira Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said: what ? no its not. he interfer in our talk, but i gve him the reply. so wheres the dodging ? so i asked you again the same question. care to explain ? As explained earlier, the turks, the safavids , the mughals, the afghans, in short the murderous invading muslim savages are the reason for you reading your prayers in arabic in this day and age. Your ancestors were pillaged, raped and forcefully converted to the religion of arabia over the course of the millennium, since the time of muhammad bin qasim King Tendulkar, SecondSlip, sergio04 and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 13 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said: so what about indian muslims ? Depends where. Kerala, peaceful converts. Ganges valley - forced to convert and coerced to convert. Quote what ? no its not. he interfer in our talk, but i gve him the reply. so wheres the dodging ? so i asked you again the same question. care to explain ? Because you did not answer his question. That is dodging. This is not a private conversation, this is a public conversation. So anyone can butt-in. Now, stop dodging the question and answer his question. sandeep 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, kira said: As explained earlier, the turks, the safavids , the mughals, the afghans, in short the murderous invading muslim savages are the reason for you reading your prayers in arabic in this day and age. Your ancestors were pillaged, raped and forcefully converted to the religion of arabia over the course of the millennium, since the time of muhammad bin qasim Nitpicking here. Not Safavids. Safavids never harmed India or historic India, except Kandahar- the limit of historic India. The Saffarids were standard genocidal islamists. Saffarids were around 800-900AD period, Safavids were around 1400s period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, kira said: As explained earlier, the turks, the safavids , the mughals, the afghans, in short the murderous invading muslim savages are the reason for you reading your prayers in arabic in this day and age. Your ancestors were pillaged, raped and forcefully converted to the religion of arabia over the course of the millennium, since the time of muhammad bin qasim Good. so what language the Indian muslims use in their prayers ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: Depends where. Kerala, peaceful converts. Ganges valley - forced to convert and coerced to convert. Because you did not answer his question. That is dodging. This is not a private conversation, this is a public conversation. So anyone can butt-in. Now, stop dodging the question and answer his question. that was his question .... Quote Pick up a history book once in a while (but not a pakistani history book) ist even a question ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kira Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said: Good. so what language the Indian muslims use in their prayers ? It applies to most subcontinental muslims (which includes Indian muslims) Of course there are bound to many exceptions, regions like south India didn't face many muslim invaders so they converted peacefully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said: that was his question .... ist even a question ? No, his question was : Quote Is Mahmud Ghazni or Khilji considered as saints in Pakistan? You are yet to answer the question, so you are dodging the question. sandeep 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) As a side note, i wish Indian media stopped glorifying the Rajputs. yes, they were brave warriors. And one or two of their rulers were smart enough to prioritize education. But thats it. They were primitive, backwards fools, even by their own day's standard - total & utter failure in forming a stable kingdom. No Rajput was able to start a dynasty - even the few Rajputs who managed to become 'maharaja', failed to form a dynasty. This, despite the entire genesis of Rajput identity happening while Muslims are invading. Being brave in war is good, but to glorify such fools, who were such utter failures in meaningful things-like forming a stable kingdom, unity, seamless transition of power, etc. is just glorification of stupids. Rajputs were more 'Hulk' than Batman. Brave. Good fighters. Completely brainless and complete failures at the big picture. Atleast some of the other people- like Bongs, Kannadingas, Telegus- they formed stable, successful empires without being a continuous fracture of bunch of tiny,petty chiefs continuously squabbling amongst themselves and occasionally electing an 'overall leader' amongst them. Edited October 10, 2017 by Muloghonto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rahulrulezz Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 26 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: As a side note, i wish Indian media stopped glorifying the Rajputs. yes, they were brave warriors. And one or two of their rulers were smart enough to prioritize education. But thats it. They were primitive, backwards fools, even by their own day's standard - total & utter failure in forming a stable kingdom. No Rajput was able to start a dynasty - even the few Rajputs who managed to become 'maharaja', failed to form a dynasty. This, despite the entire genesis of Rajput identity happening while Muslims are invading. Being brave in war is good, but to glorify such fools, who were such utter failures in meaningful things-like forming a stable kingdom, unity, seamless transition of power, etc. is just glorification of stupids. Rajputs were more 'Hulk' than Batman. Brave. Good fighters. Completely brainless and complete failures at the big picture. Atleast some of the other people- like Bongs, Kannadingas, Telegus- they formed stable, successful empires without being a continuous fracture of bunch of tiny,petty chiefs continuously squabbling amongst themselves and occasionally electing an 'overall leader' amongst them. THIS!!! Rajput this Rajput that... But guess what, they were never united and thats the reason they lost every single battle to the invaders... EVERY SINGLE BATTLE!! Heck to save themselves, they even offered liaisons by marrying their daughters to invaders to be safe.. Atleast Marathas had a long term plan and were together. They fought, went outside their territory all the way to Delhi and even Peshwar, Marathas were not as strong and brave as Rajputs, but they knew that these invaders were outsiders.. Compare that to Rajputs!! No advanced military training, no plan to extend their territories.. No wonder why half of Pakistan is full of Rajputs.. I love reading Indian history and know each and every war Indian or Rajput Kings fought.. and I learnt lessons just reading from those books.. The lesson is 'Be united or these invaders are gonna come kill you and dishonor your family'... Other than Battle of Khanwa, never ever Rajputanas were united. They rather preferred serving and fighting against Rajputs under Mughals than work together to fights the Sultans or Mughals... Regarding this movie, its fake story... Ratansingh ran away from the battle (departed), Padmavati committed Jauhar (nothing to be proud of).. In reality, it was Kamala Devi (Wife of king of Gujrat) who Allaudin married to after killing the king.. Also, Allaudin son from other wife wanted to marry Kamla Devis daughter from her first marriage.. Allaudin was a brutal guy.. I hope he is depicted as a brutal guy in the movie.. The guy ordered massacre of 50,000 Hindus in the first battle of Chittor and countless rapes there.. and that was just one battle.. Muloghonto, sergio04, tweaker and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rahulrulezz Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said: so this is another bollywood movie about an evil muslim king .... okay. Tell me one king who didn't order massacre of Hindus, and didn't do mass conversion, destroying hindu temples.. Even everyone's favorite Akbar killed 60,000 Hindus and ordered rape of thousands of women at the "third Siege of Chittorgarh".. that was just one battle... 2nd battle of Panipat, his battles against other Rajputs, his southern battles.. countless stories of him ordering rapes and beheading of Hindus Sick of Indians cheering for Akbar.. Do you guys know, so called Jodhabai eventually converted to Islam as well.. Edited October 10, 2017 by rahulrulezz sergio04, tweaker and sandeep 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 ^^ Though i agree the Marathas were far superior in statecraft to the Rajputs, even they suffered from the critical flaw of confederacy. It becomes apparent that the reason Marathas came close to being a great power and failed are two fold: 1. Like rajputs, they could not devise a successful, long term plan of imperialism, they fractured in Scindhias, Bhonsales and such, with the Peshwa running to the Brits and selling off the future of the Maratha empire, just to protect himself against the other major clans !! They were not as bad as rajputs, but their confederate nature was fully exploited by the British 2. Marathas came to power as a guerrilla army. By guerrilla warfare, they brought a major world power (Mughal Empire) to its knees. And then it became, for a 30-50 year period, a major world power. But they forgot, that they are no longer guerrilla rebels, its THEY who are the empire. And as such, failed to reform their military system. The Pindaris work great, when you are raiding a state power and inflicting 'death by a thousand cuts, will run away when you try to challenge me, until i meet you on MY terms'. But what the heck do Pindaris do when THEY are the state power, when THEY have to protect their domain and fight pitched battles ? Be useless and die. That is not to say, India didn't have good statecraft polities. Vijayanagara was our last, non-muslim polity who had a clear plan, were united, had great long term picture, etc. So were the Cholas, Palas, Rashtrakutas, Guptas and the Magadh dynasties. but the people who get all the limelight today- Rajputs and the Marathas - they were an embarrassment for the big picture in the long term. Rajputs more so than Marathas. sandeep, sergio04, BeautifulGame and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Muloghonto said: No, his question was : You are yet to answer the question, so you are dodging the question. baba ji , it was the question from maniac ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said: baba ji , it was the question from maniac ..... Which you are dodging. Thats the question i referred to. So quit dodging and answer the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 hour ago, kira said: It applies to most subcontinental muslims (which includes Indian muslims) Of course there are bound to many exceptions, regions like south India didn't face many muslim invaders so they converted peacefully lol. now its called cherry picking.... according to the legendray baba ji molughunto, you , me and his , and all of sub-cont ancestors were raped .... he said this himself on ICF .... now goodluck for your cherry picking stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyboardWarrior Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 17 minutes ago, rahulrulezz said: Tell me one king who didn't order massacre of Hindus, and didn't do mass conversion, destroying hindu temples.. Even everyone's favorite Akbar killed 60,000 Hindus and ordered rape of thousands of women at the "third Siege of Chittorgarh".. that was just one battle... 2nd battle of Panipat, his battles against other Rajputs, his southern battles.. countless stories of him ordering rapes and beheading of Hindus Sick of Indians cheering for Akbar.. Do you guys know, so called Jodhabai eventually converted to Islam as well.. tell me one king in the world who didnt do all this ? why everyone pick only muslims ? whoever gt the power, he used it by abusing others. Akbar isnt my favt., he maybe favt for indians thats why they praise him 24/7 .... he was just another mughul king. dont talk about rajputs, they got offended easily, thats why sanjay lela bhensali got the phainta from the hands of rajputs. even khilji had 2 ex- hindu wives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rahulrulezz Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said: lol. now its called cherry picking.... according to the legendray baba ji molughunto, you , me and his , and all of sub-cont ancestors were raped .... he said this himself on ICF .... now goodluck for your cherry picking stuff. Correction. Most likely 'your' great great grandmother was raped and became part of Harem, or 'your' great great great grandfather converted to save his life. Lots of Pakistanis don't know that they are seeds of these activities done to the locals. sandeep, King Tendulkar and sergio04 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts