India and the Wars

Old Feb 9th 2019, 12:24 am
  #271  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
1) You mentioned you had spoken to someone from the "general area"-------I asked WHERE the person came from. I was interested!!!!
Look at a map ---the "general area" is vast.

I pointed out that the evidence of travelling through the area by others and my evidence of travelling through in the 1960s.
As I said to EMR, I am not writing an essay I am replying in on-line discussion Forum.

I am not spending hours giving you references to all the books I have read over the last decades!!!

(If you want to be rude about my ability to speak my own language ----I can point out that bizarre typing in your post yesterday evening ----I concluded you were drunk.)

2) Goa is not part of Europe, not part of Portugal-----the important point it was not populated by Portuguese ---It was populated by Konkani/Marathi speaking indigenous people of the Indian sub-continent.

3) No I don't think that when I speak to people who run/work in Indian hospitals/clinics

6) You are missing knowledge!!
So now Goans were not Indian but indigenous people residing on the Indian sub continent.
Using your definition who is an Indian,, are all those descended from the Moghul invaders who arrived at the same time as the Portuguese , Indian or not.
Not being Indigenous , they cannot be.
Are those in the south of a different ethnic and cultural mix who have been on the sub continent longer than any others , more Indian than those in the North, invaders or migrants ..
My definition , citizens of the Republic post 1947 makes far more sense than any of yours..
EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 12:35 am
  #272  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
EMR I think it is you who has argued about dual nationality etc. and loyalty----why is it different for Indians? They didn't choose to be part of the Raj!

You have done nothing but excuse the foreign occupation of another country.

Many migrants return to India. "ALL"---- are not the same , individuals are different.
Obviously most who stay are better off than when they came just as are most of the British expats on this Forum.

(The 'waiter' in my example, is in fact a head waiter in a large up-market restaurant , he has a much better life where he is than he would have if he started again in the UK)
Using your logic what is now India is nothing but the result of foreign occupation.
Its the history of the subcontinent , of what is now the Republic .
When did the Moghuls return to the North, when did they return all the land they occupied, restore the rights and priveledges of those they conquered , apologised for forced religious conversions Tec.
All at that was happening at the same time as the Portuguese arrived, please explain the difference if you can..

Last edited by EMR; Feb 9th 2019 at 12:38 am.
EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 12:37 am
  #273  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
No they were Indian both days. What do you suggest they were??
The fact you believe that explains why there is do much conflict between India and Pakistan and between various communities within India.
You want to force your definition on everyone whether they agree or not.
EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 12:42 am
  #274  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,783
Bipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by EMR
So now Goans were not Indian but indigenous people residing on the Indian sub continent.
Using your definition who is an Indian,, are all those descended from the Moghul invaders who arrived at the same time as the Portuguese , Indian or not.
Not being Indigenous , they cannot be.
Are those in the south of a different ethnic and cultural mix who have been on the sub continent longer than any others , more Indian than those in the North, invaders or migrants ..
My definition , citizens of the Republic post 1947 makes far more sense than any of yours..
EMR can you not get the point -----they are Indians who happen to be Goans.
Californians are Americans!!!

What is your problem? Some of these posts, yours and Morpeths are becoming very insulting to Indian people, they didn't become 'different' people overnight in 1947. They were what they were born.
Bipat is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 12:52 am
  #275  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,783
Bipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by EMR
The fact you believe that explains why there is do much conflict between India and Pakistan and between various communities within India.
You want to force your definition on everyone whether they agree or not.
Pakistan is a totally different and unique situation, a new independent country was formed and the people 'became' Pakistani.*
The conflicts with Pakistan are political.

You well know that there are religious conflicts in India, they are all Indians ---what is your definition???

The inter-State conflicts are just the same as the inter-county conflicts in the UK. They are all Indians!!!! What would you call them???


* Go to the Wagah border ceremony which happens each day. People near to death brought on stretchers mourning their 'old country'.
The people on the last bus out waving with friendship.

Bipat is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 2:13 am
  #276  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
Pakistan is a totally different and unique situation, a new independent country was formed and the people 'became' Pakistani.*
The conflicts with Pakistan are political.

You well know that there are religious conflicts in India, they are all Indians ---what is your definition???

The inter-State conflicts are just the same as the inter-county conflicts in the UK. They are all Indians!!!! What would you call them???


* Go to the Wagah border ceremony which happens each day. People near to death brought on stretchers mourning their 'old country'.
The people on the last bus out waving with friendship.
Today I would call them Indians because that is who they are citizens of the Republic of India that came into eexistence in 1947..
In what us now Pakistan you would have called them Indians .
If those ruling India decided tomorrow to change its name as it has done with many cities from their anglisided versions to their created " Indian " version would you still call its inhabitants Indians or what it's government now termed them..

I am sure there are Pakistani survivors if the massacres of Muslims by Hindus and Sikhs who feel exactly the same as those on the Indian side of the border.

You have not answered the question concerning the Moghul invaders who behaved exactly , like the Portuguese,

EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 2:31 am
  #277  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
EMR can you not get the point -----they are Indians who happen to be Goans.
Californians are Americans!!!

What is your problem? Some of these posts, yours and Morpeths are becoming very insulting to Indian people, they didn't become 'different' people overnight in 1947. They were what they were born.
Which was Sikhs, Kerelans, Rajputs , , Tamils Tec etc, all living under their local rulers or in some cases under direct Britsh rule.
In 1947 they became citizens of the Republic of India and from that day Indians in law , ,locally and internationally..
EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 3:02 am
  #278  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,783
Bipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by EMR
Today I would call them Indians because that is who they are citizens of the Republic of India that came into eexistence in 1947..
In what us now Pakistan you would have called them Indians .
If those ruling India decided tomorrow to change its name as it has done with many cities from their anglisided versions to their created " Indian " version would you still call its inhabitants Indians or what it's government now termed them..

I am sure there are Pakistani survivors if the massacres of Muslims by Hindus and Sikhs who feel exactly the same as those on the Indian side of the border.




You have not answered the question concerning the Moghul invaders who behaved exactly , like the Portuguese,

The subcontinent has been known throughout history as "India" the people living there as "Indians"-----BHARAT. The British did not create India.

Yes of course there are Muslims on the Pakistan side of the border who have returned to India. You forget Bangladesh---millions have come back from there.

The name changes you refer to were mostly back to original names ----not a "version". Some of the reverted names are used all the time, some are never used in general conversation-- (the Anglicised sometimes being easier to say----) The name changes were also to some roads along with cities.
Nobody in conversation refers to Bangalore as Bengaluru. But all refer to Mumbai and Chennai.

The Mughal invaders came in the 16th century ---time of HenryV111. They stayed, settled, made their home there, intermarried. The Emperors varied good and bad. The British were there in the 20th century
A minority of the British Raj made India their actual home,
Bipat is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 3:13 am
  #279  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
The subcontinent has been known throughout history as "India" the people living there as "Indians"-----BHARAT. The British did not create India.

Yes of course there are Muslims on the Pakistan side of the border who have returned to India. You forget Bangladesh---millions have come back from there.

The name changes you refer to were mostly back to original names ----not a "version". Some of the reverted names are used all the time, some are never used in general conversation-- (the Anglicised sometimes being easier to say----) The name changes were also to some roads along with cities.
Nobody in conversation refers to Bangalore as Bengaluru. But all refer to Mumbai and Chennai.

The Mughal invaders came in the 16th century ---time of HenryV111. They stayed, settled, made their home there, intermarried. The Emperors varied good and bad. The British were there in the 20th century
A minority of the British Raj made India their actual home,
You still do not get it do you,
Indians was a term used by Europeans to describe the people's of the subcontinent ,
I doubt that until relatively modern times the people's who lived there called them selves Indians, , anything but. .
The Portuguese also came in the 16th century , The Moghuls slaughtered 100s thousand, executed untold thousands who would not convert, took vast t areas if lands and wealth away from those who they conquered., acted in thecsame way ascthe Portuguese but many many times worse.
How many Goans women chose suicide rather than live under Portuguese rule as did the Rajputs..
You either have double standards or do not know as much about the history of the sub continent as you think.
You decide which.
EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 3:22 am
  #280  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,783
Bipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by EMR
Which was Sikhs, Kerelans, Rajputs , , Tamils Tec etc, all living under their local rulers or in some cases under direct Britsh rule.
In 1947 they became citizens of the Republic of India and from that day Indians in law , ,locally and internationally..
Sikhism is a religion not a area of land. Kerala (spelling) was formed in 1956---when there was a reorganisation of States.
Telangana was created in 1914 as the 29th State.
Just as county boundaries are changed in the UK but on a much larger scale.
The people are and were all 'Indian' regardless of who ruled the local areas at any one time.

If you want to read about the ancient unification of India via Hinduism there are many books you can read (written by non-Indians so as not to upset your prejudices.)

Bipat is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 3:47 am
  #281  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
Sikhism is a religion not a area of land. Kerala (spelling) was formed in 1956---when there was a reorganisation of States.
Telangana was created in 1914 as the 29th State.
Just as county boundaries are changed in the UK but on a much larger scale.
The people are and were all 'Indian' regardless of who ruled the local areas at any one time.

If you want to read about the ancient unification of India via Hinduism there are many books you can read (written by non-Indians so as not to upset your prejudices.)
Wrong yet again, they were inhabitants of the sub continent, only referred to as Indians by the outsiders, Europeans from the 15th century onwards

You clearly know nothing of the Sikh empire,
A people who ruled by conquest large areas of the NW of the subcontinent or the many other diverse groups who fought against and exploited each other for 2000 years..
I doubt any of them ever referred to them selves as Indians until the times of British rule..

EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 3:56 am
  #282  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,783
Bipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by EMR
You still do not get it do you,
Indians was a term used by Europeans to describe the people's of the subcontinent ,
I doubt that until relatively modern times the people's who lived there called them selves Indians, , anything but. .
The Portuguese also came in the 16th century , The Moghuls slaughtered 100s thousand, executed untold thousands who would not convert, took vast t areas if lands and wealth away from those who they conquered., acted in thecsame way ascthe Portuguese but many many times worse.
How many Goans women chose suicide rather than live under Portuguese rule as did the Rajputs..
You either have double standards or do not know as much about the history of the sub continent as you think.
You decide which.
I do "get it " EMR ---your ridiculous posts trying to convince yourself that the British created 'India'. The Republic was created when the British left. The Republic of Pakistan was created in 1956, it was Pakistan before this happened!!!
Yes India was a Western term----what was Bharat?


You keep flipping back and forth in history.
History of Rajputs in India : Rajput Provinces of India

When the Portuguese first came to India, to the Goa area it was to convert to Christianity, Read about the Inquisition there. Read about the tortures. I am sure there would have been suicides by men and women, read about it. Many who could, fled not just Muslims and Hindus but also Christians including the ancestors of the Christian community in our town.

(Are you now going to know tell me I don't know who lives in my own town??)

Of course centuries later it was much different---temples rebuilt and freedom of religion, and travel through or to visit temples allowed by Indians from outside the borders.

I note that you call the inhabitants Goans not Portuguese -----They always were. Why do you and Morpeth think not it right that they should rule their own State and take part in the ruling of India.

Bipat is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 4:10 am
  #283  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
I do "get it " EMR ---your ridiculous posts trying to convince yourself that the British created 'India'. The Republic was created when the British left. The Republic of Pakistan was created in 1956, it was Pakistan before this happened!!!
Yes India was a Western term----what was Bharat?


You keep flipping back and forth in history.
History of Rajputs in India : Rajput Provinces of India

When the Portuguese first came to India, to the Goa area it was to convert to Christianity, Read about the Inquisition there. Read about the tortures. I am sure there would have been suicides by men and women, read about it. Many who could, fled not just Muslims and Hindus but also Christians including the ancestors of the Christian community in our town.

(Are you now going to know tell me I don't know who lives in my own town??)

Of course centuries later it was much different---temples rebuilt and freedom of religion, and travel through or to visit temples allowed by Indians from outside the borders.

I note that you call the inhabitants Goans not Portuguese -----They always were. Why do you and Morpeth think not it right that they should rule their own State and take part in the ruling of India.
Once again your ignorance or bias is showing.
What the Portuguese did was nothing compared to what the various rival groups and other conquerors did to the inhabitants of the subcontinent in the time before, around then and in later years.
live in your dream world in which you think that the Republic of India would exist today even if the British had not ruled.
For a start you would not have a family, a husband who migrated to the UK.
Try connecting the dots for once in your life.
Note I refer to Goans not Indians, they did not become citizens of India until 1961.
EMR is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 5:04 am
  #284  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,783
Bipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond reputeBipat has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by EMR
Once again your ignorance or bias is showing.
What the Portuguese did was nothing compared to what the various rival groups and other conquerors did to the inhabitants of the subcontinent in the time before, around then and in later years.
live in your dream world in which you think that the Republic of India would exist today even if the British had not ruled.
For a start you would not have a family, a husband who migrated to the UK.
Try connecting the dots for once in your life.
Note I refer to Goans not Indians, they did not become citizens of India until 1961.
1) It is not what the Portuguese were doing in 1962, it was what they didn't do ---which was 'leave'.
The Portuguese Inquisition in Goa: A brief history | IndiaFactsIndiaFacts----read it.

2) Your strange world, when on other threads you condemn Brexiters as Empire2 and on this thread you praise Empires.

3) My husband did not migrate to the UK (he came to take a particular Postgrad exam. and then to return). Yes it was because of British rule that such exams were taken in the UK.
(I could have married someone else and had a family if we hadn't met!!!!!!)

4) The State of Goa was created in 1987. Previously it was an area of the Konkan coast of India which had been taken over by European traders.
They are still Goans and also they are Indians.
The present CM of Goa, Manohar Parrikar was previously Defence Minister of India. (Before you make any of your usual remarks he is seriously ill).


Bipat is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2019, 5:16 am
  #285  
EMR
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 26,724
EMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond reputeEMR has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: India and the Wars

Originally Posted by Bipat
1) It is not what the Portuguese were doing in 1962, it was what they didn't do ---which was 'leave'.
The Portuguese Inquisition in Goa: A brief history | IndiaFactsIndiaFacts----read it.

2) Your strange world, when on other threads you condemn Brexiters as Empire2 and on this thread you praise Empires.

3) My husband did not migrate to the UK (he came to take a particular Postgrad exam. and then to return). Yes it was because of British rule that such exams were taken in the UK.
(I could have married someone else and had a family if we hadn't met!!!!!!)

4) The State of Goa was created in 1987. Previously it was an area of the Konkan coast of India which had been taken over by European traders.
They are still Goans and also they are Indians.
The present CM of Goa, Manohar Parrikar was previously Defence Minister of India. (Before you make any of your usual remarks he is seriously ill).

Indians were Indians when they were not, your husband is not a migrant even though officially in the UK he is.
It's no wonder you are such hard work yo debate with.

After post after post after post accusing the Portuguese of one thing after another, when pointed out to you that they behaved no differently than did the inhabitants and jnvadets of the sub continent did , now it's just because they did not leave.
Do you realise just how silly you look sometimes.
EMR is offline  

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.