Who names their kid knowing that the name is that of a tyrant?

[MechEng]

A gentleman on a YouTube video posted this:

 

"As per history, Tamerlane came to India to loot. The gentlemen now who belong to Pakistan were also was attacked, massacred and looted by that merciless invader. So praising that brute invader is a sadistic approached. Please visit Samarkand, Bukhara and you will see the grand mosques, famous Bukhara fortress standing tall and was created by looting our wealth. Then it came under czarist rule and started seeing bad times. As of now one 'som' the uzbek currency is equivalent to Indian money 0.02, means 2 paise. Alas, now there is no looted wealth to support its economy and Uzbekistan is showing those beautiful structures as well as ruins to foreign tourists to make some foreign exchange. The guide was silent when I asked (knowing the answer very well) that how rich could be the amirs of this land including Fargana valley that can afford such great buildings, mosques & monuments? Was it built from looted wealth? The northern invaders came and plundered every one including moslems, hindus, Sikhs & budhists without caring who they were killing! Now cheer up! "

[punjabi_khota]

14 hours ago, Sajid_Rana said:

Whenever there is any mention of any successful Muslim ruler it seems to hit a nerve of all Indians. Why??? May be because our rulers ruled them for 100+ years. One cannot change history so just accept the fact and move on. No need to remain bitter about it.

What do you mean "our rulers"  and "them"

[Austin 3:!6]

I am an INDIAN celebrity.

My dad was an ex INDIAN cricket captain.

I got a celebrity status bcoz INDIANs pay their hard earn money to watch my films.

But I want to keep my childs name on someone who killed thousands of INDIANs

 

Well done Saif

 

Am I surprised? Hah no.

 

[Mariyam]

6 hours ago, punjabi_khota said:

What do you mean "our rulers"  and "them"

Many are under the impression that they belong to the same 'us' who ruled over Al Andalus in Spain. 

 

Identity crisis 101.

Edited December 28, 2016 by Mariyam

[zen]

Ind had its moments in the Before Common Era. But in the comman era like in the15th to 18th century period, Ind (the sub con region) probably has missed its renaissance and industrial revolution, something that could have changed the destiny of the region

 

One of the reasons for Ind to not really get going despite the start it had probably could be attributed to the constant threat from Islamic invaders and rulers 

 

May be someone can throw some light on this issue

Edited December 28, 2016 by zen

[Muloghonto]

19 minutes ago, zen said:

Ind had its moments in the Before Common Era. But in the comman era like in the15th to 18th century period, Ind (the sub con region) probably has missed its renaissance and industrial revolution, something that could have changed the destiny of the region

 

One of the reasons for Ind to not really get going despite the start it had probably could be attributed to the constant threat from Islamic invaders and rulers 

 

May be someone can throw some light on this issue

Long story short, political power vacuum since the collapse of the Magadha Empire in the 1st century BC.

The Guptas tried hard, but they were not a centralized empire like the Magadhi empire, they were similar to other Indian empires who had a core territory they ruled directly (in the case of the Guptas, its UP, Bihar, Jharkhand & Bengal) and various layers of vassal kings who ruled on their behalf.

Islamic invasions sent India into the stone age, not just due to their barbarism, pillage, rape & genocides, but also because muslims in India were not patrons of science, economics or technology. 

 

Our basic failing has been lack of horses & central administration. We didn't have the central leadership like China, who in the face of lacking horses, a) built the great wall of China to restrict horsemen movements and b) sent a mission to Balkh to acquire horses, specifically for the purposes of breeding them for domestic needs. 

But prior invasions, such as the Greco-Bactrian + Scythian invasions that ended the Magadha Empire, followed by the Kushans (who became the most indianized of the foreigners to rule over India), Hepthalites, etc. all fundamentally weakened our political system to a point where central administration & unified resistance against foreigners were not present, when the Islamic barbarians came pouring through.

 

If you look at the geography of North-west historic india, we have the Suleiman ranges leading to the Indo-Gangetic plains and thats pretty much the largest flat piece of the planet without any major hills or natural chokepoints. In such a terrain, you either need to be the cavalry expert, to perform lightning raids & quickly relocate from point A to B (this is what the muslims did) or you need a unified central command to spam out enough infantry all over the frontier provinces to check these hit and run attacks. 

Because if you look at the template of Islamic invasions, for the first 500 years (700s AD-1200 AD), they all did the same thing : they set up shop on the western banks of the Indus, launched hit and run attacks on the lands east of the Indus, till the local infrastructure, economy & administration was crippled and only THEN did they show up for a pitched battle. 

 

In a more direct cause-effect, the Kannauj triangle warfare, which lasted for almost 300 years and left pretty much all of India except the extreme south drained, provided just the right climate for Islamic invasions to succeed in India.

 

 

If we are to compare two mega-civilization entities like China & India, they both faced similar odds/circumstances through history and China had a delayed start due to its less strategic & less fertile location but China succeeded where India failed, a lot of which can be pinned to the success of Confucianism versus Chanakya-niti & Arthashastra. 
Like Confucius, Chanakya provided a template for administration, which was followed for almost 1500 years after him. But whereas Confucius focussed on creating state mechanisms, like central bureau of revenues or central bureau of administration, Chanakya focussed power in the hand of the ruler itself. Its clear, reading Chanakya-niti that if you have a super-motivated ruler, like Ashoka or Harsha, your empire would do exellently, as the emperor personally oversaw the tax, military, planning, governance etc.But if your emperor sucks, the whole nation falls apart, as the emperor is the lynchpin that holds the realm together. Whereas in China, the system ran itself and many a times, despite the emperor. 

 

In effect, we went for two different approaches - India went for the 'best returns policy', China went for the 'least prone to failure policy'. 

Edited December 28, 2016 by Muloghonto

[Book_Worm]

On 28/12/2016 at 3:02 AM, Sajid_Rana said:

Whenever there is any mention of any successful Muslim ruler it seems to hit a nerve of all Indians. Why??? May be because our rulers ruled them for 100+ years. One cannot change history so just accept the fact and move on. No need to remain bitter about it.

Maybe they ruled over 100+ years over rest of india  mostly northern part which included PAKISTAN.But in south  they had a limited presence. So get your head outta your ass.. And those muslim rulers actually ruled over you guys in fact more over your part of the land then ours. Ur people have been so much raped that it has become normal for you  and now you guys actually glorify it. THEY RULED/RAPED/LOOTED/MADE SLAVES OF YOUR ANCESTORS WHO LIVED IN EXTREME NORTH NOT MINE.! Indians are not bitter over it. we do not want to forget our past and the mistakes that happened. We do not want to repeat the same mistakes our ancestor did. Never Again.

Edited December 29, 2016 by Book_Worm

[kabbirann]

First demonetisation and then this

I hold Rajiv Gandhi responsible for the Sikh genocide in 84,does that mean I fight with anyone who names their son Rajiv?

Vinash kale viprit buddhi and India da beda gark.

 

 

Edited December 29, 2016 by kabbirann
nvm

[Book_Worm]

20 minutes ago, kabbirann said:

First demonetisation and then this

I hold Rajiv Gandhi responsible for the Sikh genocide in 84,does that mean I fight with anyone who names their son Rajiv?

Vinash kale viprit buddhi and India da beda gark.

 

 

Thank god somebody is talking sense. But still people will argue over this.

[Vilander]

4 hours ago, kabbirann said:

First demonetisation and then this

I hold Rajiv Gandhi responsible for the Sikh genocide in 84,does that mean I fight with anyone who names their son Rajiv?

Vinash kale viprit buddhi and India da beda gark.

 

 

the minor matter of fact diff being Timur actually physically killed,raped,pillaged Indians, and many historians and scholars hold him responsible for a genocide of Indians. 

[Vilander]

On 12/27/2016 at 4:32 PM, Sajid_Rana said:

Whenever there is any mention of any successful Muslim ruler it seems to hit a nerve of all Indians. Why??? May be because our rulers ruled them for 100+ years. One cannot change history so just accept the fact and move on. No need to remain bitter about it.

who is our ?

you mean your ancestors who got raped, plundered and war babies born off as muslims to escape persecution in ancient divided India ? ok.

[Ironhide]

Today, we got our hands on Saif Ali Khan's WhatsApp display picture and it's too cute for words. He dedicated the picture to his little munchkin as the picture shows a baby boy riding a rocking horse with a crown on his cute head and a sword in his hand.

 

 

 

http://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainment/photos/369595/cute-little-nawab-saif-ali-khans-whatsapp-display-picture-dedicated-his

[RedFever]

Saif's whatsapp display pic, sword in the hand of a young kid. No wonder what these people do when they grow up.                 

 

[Texy]

On 12/27/2016 at 3:32 PM, Sajid_Rana said:

Whenever there is any mention of any successful Muslim ruler it seems to hit a nerve of all Indians. Why??? May be because our rulers ruled them for 100+ years. One cannot change history so just accept the fact and move on. No need to remain bitter about it.

Lol "our" & "them" .

[Muloghonto]

On 12/27/2016 at 1:32 PM, Sajid_Rana said:

Whenever there is any mention of any successful Muslim ruler it seems to hit a nerve of all Indians. Why??? May be because our rulers ruled them for 100+ years. One cannot change history so just accept the fact and move on. No need to remain bitter about it.

LOL.

 

You are just as much part of the 'them' as we are. Just because you are muslim, doesn't make you a mongol or a Turk. In India or Pakistan, unless you literally are from some far-flung corner of malakand division or Khyber region, you aint a Turk or a Mongol. Even if you are, chances are you are so diluted with us Indian genes that you are more Indian than Turkic/Mongolic. 

 

The only difference between you and us, is that your ancestors converted after being raped & pillaged, ours didn't. 

[Muloghonto]

3 hours ago, Ironhide said:

Today, we got our hands on Saif Ali Khan's WhatsApp display picture and it's too cute for words. He dedicated the picture to his little munchkin as the picture shows a baby boy riding a rocking horse with a crown on his cute head and a sword in his hand.

 

 

 

http://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainment/photos/369595/cute-little-nawab-saif-ali-khans-whatsapp-display-picture-dedicated-his

 

See, this is why i think naming your kid 'Timur' as an Indian is so wrong- just as wrong as Pakistanis celebrating those who raped, killed & enslaved their ancestors by naming their missiles after these barbarians like Ghori, Ghaznawi, etc. 

 

Saif isn't mongol or Turkic to lay claim to the name 'Timur' in an ethnic sort of way, he is simply naming his kid that to glorify a mass-murdering genocider who was hated for his genocides, even in his day, by both hindus and muslims.

 

[punjabi_khota]

5 hours ago, RedFever said:

Saif's whatsapp display pic, sword in the hand of a young kid. No wonder what these people do when they grow up.                 

 

 

100% guaranteed fake

[randomGuy]

16 hours ago, kabbirann said:

First demonetisation and then this

I hold Rajiv Gandhi responsible for the Sikh genocide in 84,does that mean I fight with anyone who names their son Rajiv?

Vinash kale viprit buddhi and India da beda gark.

 

 

Would be great if someone names their son Jagdish Tytler. wouldn't it?

[coffee_rules]

On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 5:49 PM, kabbirann said:

First demonetisation and then this

I hold Rajiv Gandhi responsible for the Sikh genocide in 84,does that mean I fight with anyone who names their son Rajiv?

Vinash kale viprit buddhi and India da beda gark.

 

 

People should know the difference  between 'being accused of' v/s 'actually commiting it and recorded in history as well as relishing it in memoirs'.

Edited December 30, 2016 by coffee_rules

[randomGuy]

5 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

People should know difference the between 'being accused of' v/s 'actually commiting it and recorded in history as well as relishing it in memoirs'.

Arre ye chhodo sirji , I am sure that if saif liked Tytler surname better than Khan, liked the name Jagdish and named his son Jagdish Tytler instead of taimur, kabbirran (and any Hindu or Sikh according to kabbirran) would have no opinion on it.

Edited December 30, 2016 by randomGuy