India and Iran and Arabia FIXED

India and Iran and Arabia FIXED

Pakistan is basically Belgium of Asia lol

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharata_Khanda
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmana_Hindu_Shahis_of_Afghanistan
youtube.com/watch?v=xY7m4KzYR4Q
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

How to fix all those areas

>remove Islam and Hinduism

Shittiest religions.

>remove Islam and Hinduism
So they'll all be Zoroastrians then?

Why would Saudi Arabia take all of those shit tier unstable countries?

Why would Iran take all of those backwards goat fuckers living in the mountains?

Why would India take Bangladesh aka Even Shittier India, which seems impossible but they somehow manage to be even shittier?

Blobbing different groups and cultures together might look pleasing on a map but to guarantee world peace you need lots of small, culturally disparate countries with clearly defined natural borders guaranteed by a sovereign party. The Indian subcontinent and middle east should be broken down into 2 federation of at least 10 countries each, not randomly combined into 3 countries.

Also why haven't Americans noticed that literally the only place straight line borders are a good idea is in America? In Africa it's an arbitrary mess, and there's a reason it doesn't happen anywhere else.

Because they are of the same ethnicity

same reason Hitler wanted shitty Austria

hmm

why did no one conquer oman? seems like a very strategic location

oman had it's own empire

they colonized parts of east africa

Oman was a trade parter to a lot of empires. And the Persians did conqure Oman quite a bit of times

That was a bit later

TIL the omani empire stretched from the east african coast of somali to tanzania
i only knew about Zanzibar before, huh

wow

sounds like the most irrelevant empire ever lmao

Except in this scenario only the Arabs (red) will be Muslim.

Islam will be banned in Persia and India lol

Persia =Zoroastrian

India= Hindu

>Why would Saudi Arabia take all of those shit tier unstable countries?
Arabs
>Why would Iran take all of those backwards goat fuckers living in the mountains?
Aryans
>Why would India take Bangladesh aka Even Shittier India, which seems impossible but they somehow manage to be even shittier?
Indo-Aryans

Hinduism is shit too and that Zoaraster-shit is a meme. How about atheism.

>How about atheism.
no

Savage.

...

Because culture is important part of identity.

Eventually as society modernizes pagan faiths become cultural relics like Shintoism.

Abrahamic religions on the other hand only grow and destroy culture

Not an argument.

t. 1/64 Ayran Iranian Zoroastrian
Islam is widely accepted by Persians and they had pretty good Islamic leaders

Why did the Ottomans and Mughals never double team the Safavids? Weren't they both Turkspawn Sunnis?

Fucking incompetent cunts I swear

>see post
>see flag
weird desu

I researched it a little further because I've never heard of such an empire till now.
>Between the 1750s and the 1850s, Oman re-established its authority over the islands of the Strait of Hormuz, leasing them from the Persians, secured more than 100 miles of the Makran coast of Baluchistan, reasserted its claims to Dhofar and to the ports of East Africa, and even attempted to take Bahrain. The Mazrui rulers of Mombasa were repeatedly attacked and finally submitted in 1837. The Omani fleet once again became the most powerful local force in the Indian Ocean, if not throughout the East. The architect of this remarkable Omani expansion in the early nineteenth century was the Sultan Seyyid Said, who reigned from 1804 to 1856. He ordered vessels from Indian shipyards, including, for example, the 74-gun Liverpool, launched in 1826, which from 1836 became the Royal Navy Imaum. He possessed in all fifteen western-style warships, as well as a vast fleet of Arab vessels, which could be used for both commercial and military purposes. He could probably embark as many as 20,000 troops. When the Sultan arrived at Zanzibar in East Africa in 1828, his fleet consisted of one 64-gun ship, three frigates of 36 guns, two brigs of 14 guns, and 100 armed transport dhows with about 6,000 soldiers.

>By the time the Sultan moved his capital from Muscat to Zanzibar in 1840 he had established a highly successful economic system there: an Omani emigrant plantocracy was cultivating cloves, successfully introduced into Zanzibar in 1828, and Indian agents and capitalists, for centuries familiar in Oman and on the East African coast, were capitalising the ivory and slaving caravans which tapped the animal and human resources of the far interior of East Africa.

He's probably from Novi Pazar

They were, and Sefavids kept a pro Mughal diplomacy for some time, and when the Mughals dissobayed they beat them back. The way the Sefavids delt with Ottomans was attrition warfare because of Superior Ottoman warfare

Now the Afsharid (Nader Shah) was a complete different story, in his time, the Ottomans were weak, and the Mughals too so he did beat them both in his lifetime but he went crazy before achieving his goal (attacked his personal advisors a lot, grew paranoid, blinded his son)

haha no kys

superior Ottoman numbers*
A few times they did manage to beat the Ottomans tho

So what I said about the whole Somalia to Tanzania thing was not entirely true. They controlled parts of AFrica, but it was constrained to cities and islands in the southeastern Africa coast.

Yeah, I read Nader Shah's biggest idol was Timur. That's fucked up.

Middle eastern history is intresting. And i have nothing against Zoroastrianism but it's realistically dead, and not getting revived.

I was stating a fact not arguing you

>Pakistan is basically Belgium of Asia lol
I don't know enough about Pakistan or Belgium to know what this means. Pls explain.

Another non-argument. Keep it going.

true

He means an artificial non-country. Which is correct, both are, but every South-Asian country is artificial. India is too, although a much better functioning one.

That's not a good enough reason. It takes more to unite people than race. Ideology and values are much more powerful imo.

>but every South-Asian country is artificial. India is too, although a much better functioning one.
I asked around a few weeks ago to a couple of Indians and apparently that's a meme.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharata_Khanda

They said India was visualized as a sub-continent centuries (or millennia idk) before the modern world right now.

But It's interesting for me to why Afghanistan's included inside it.

And aren't all countries artificial?

I mean, India's borders were entirely created by brits.

And Afghanistan is on the crossroads between turks, persians and indians, so they are a clusterfuck of massive proportions, to they belong to the greater iran area in my opinion

But also West half of Pakistan is Persian speaking and the East half speaks Indic language

>Removing the last Indo-European religion


Kys leftist scum

>Indo-European
>a fucking linguistic group

Fucking frog cunt FUCK OFF

Thousands of Kurds are converting back to Zoroastrianism.


>Indo-European
>Not a Macro-Ethnicity encompassing Europe, India, and Persia


KYS

You're a fucking retard. Dumb frog.

>I mean, India's borders were entirely created by brits.
Yeah but I mean the concept of acknowledging each other as being similar and not foreigners. It wasn't the same as, say Northern Europeans and Southern Europeans a century ago.

> to they belong to the greater iran area in my opinion
Same. Their language is somewhat closer to Iran but I think their culture is a mix between Indian and Iranian.

>Kurds
>relevant
Kurds are we wuzers, non Persians who try to be Persian . They'll claim Nowruz too.

>forcing Iran to take care of Afghanistan and Tajikistan

why? They may both consist of mostly Iranian people but that's not a good enough answer.

>every South-Asian country is artificial

mostly just India, Pakistan and Bangladesh

It was, but in the same way Europeans see themselves as European, as opposed to as a singular country

>But It's interesting for me to why Afghanistan's included inside it.

Historical cultural/religious influence and former territory of the Mauryan and Kushan Empires

I wanted to exclude you but youre a literl island so thats quite logical

Well there's also the Maldives (also islands, granted) and Nepal and Bhutan

Do you think Afghanistan should be included in the Bharat country?

Pretty British.

I'd say it's more culturally and genetically central Asian nowadays, but then again North East India is part of India

and Afghanistan is part of SAARC (admittedly SAARC is useless aside from as a geographical indicator)

In either case, akhand bharat is not likely to come to pass any time soon, possibly not ever

>I mean, India's borders were entirely created by brits.
all borders were created by someone though

Brilliant remark.

every single border was created by someone, yu can't just say ____ isn't a real country because its borders were created by ____.

>Implying Indo-European wasn't a single language a long time ago
>Implying Indo-European wasn't created by a single united people

Avestan Pitar
Sanskrit Pitr
Latin Pater
Greek Pater
English Father
German Vater
Hittie Atar
Gaullish Ater
Gothic Atar/Atta
and so on

Do you think that akhand union might be more likely to happen between your three countries then? If the fighting ever stops?

He's right in a way. Are we going to say that India is an artificial country half a millennia from now? All countries were once 'artificial'.

When a foreign invader decides what a country's border will be based on his own interest, with little to no historical precedent, it's an artificial country.

Founders of Safavids were Turks too.In fact they migrated from Anatolia.But that time all the Turkish countries were rivals because there was no nationalism at that time.

No way dude, why would Pakistan want a hundred million hindus?

That's bullshit. That's like saying my countries artificial and we all know that's not true.

Why not have the Shah keep them in check instead of Murica or Russssia

Which country?

>what is flag

Flag? I've never heard of that country.

good post

>take care

mate iran can't even take care of itself, just because it has a larger population and avoided a war with the soviets doesn't mean it's not a shithole

Mirwais pls go

Three countries? It encompasses Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri-Lanka and sometimes the Maldives

And not likely, for a plethora of reasons; even an economic and free movement union like the EU is not likely for several decades at least

add egypt sudan and israel to the list too then we fucked around there as well
im gonna think of some more countries that are fake

you posting under a dutch flag reaffirms my point

Iran has an HDI of 0.766 and GDP(PPP)/capita of Iran 17,303 USD, i'd say it's doing better off than Tajikistan/Afghanistan at least

Those are all artificial, though Israel for obvious reasons has a strong identity which means it's not a non-country, unlike say belgium

I'm not Iranian tho, Gulbuddin.

iran also has the benefit of having the 4th largest oil reserves in the world

saudi arabia is also a shithole, despite having a high hdi

i meant we changed egypts borders

Egypts borders are still similar to the kingdoms that used to be there but they could be better

afghanistan is included because the mauryans 'conquered it', indians forget that people from afghanistan have been conquering much of india for most of history

kushans weren't indian

>Iran annexes all that land

>Persians immediately become a minority in their own country

Yeah I'm sure that'll go well.

Also:

>United Arabia
>Implying they won't immediately start killing each other over tribal bullshit

>India wanting another 300 million mudslimes in its country

Get ready for a genocide of epic proportions.

lolwut Afghans have never in their history conquered India. Rather, Afghans formed Hindu proxy empires.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmana_Hindu_Shahis_of_Afghanistan

people from afghanistan, not afghans, I specifically said people from within the geography of afghanistan, aka where the kushans originated, where the delhi sultanates originated, where the lodi dynasty, samanids etc. and many many more originated, hell even the mughals originated in afghanistan

Azeri =/= Turk. They may speak turkish but they were their own Iranian tribe, like the Kurds. Safavids were a mix of Azeri, Kurdish, and Persian leadership. 100% Iranian.

They were actually at the forefront of kebab-removal when be Ottomans tried to fuck around. They beheaded armies and waved around their heads on spears in Tabriz.

the kushans, ghorids and the ghaznavids would like to have a word with you

though to be fair, only north/central india were ever conquered/ruled by them, southern india was pretty much always untouched, is there a reason why?

>Founders of Safavids migrated from Anatolia
>Speaks Oghuz turkish
>Not Turkish
t.Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

itt: sandniggers and street shitting cow piss drinkers

you all have to go back

>is there a reason why?
invaders couldn't handle the designated shitting streets of ancient india and their poo powers

>Speaking a language makes you part of that ethnicity

I guess pic related is Turkic too, no?

Wow, are you insane? Not a single one of those empires originated in Afghanistan. The Lodis were Muslims of Hindu descent and came from modern-day Pakistan.

The Mughals originated in Uzbekistan and in a single generation began intermarrying with Rajputs.

The closest anyone from Afghanistan came to conquering a part of India was under Durrani, when three Muslim empires teamed up against a lone Maratha Empire, but were kicked out of India entirely by the Sikh Empire.

If all the country speaks it yes it will

>If all the country speaks it yes it will

You seriously believe that?

I guess Syrian rapefugees would also be considered Turkic to you if they manage to learn your language?

Seems you guys really are European.

>Billy wants to make this a shart-mart safe zone
Can you be poor, fat slob in another thread?

youtube.com/watch?v=xY7m4KzYR4Q

I guess that's why anglos are so successful. They're so disgusting that they eat poo.

>Bahlul Khan Lodi (r.1451–89) belonged to the Lodi (Pashtun tribe) hailing from the Multan region (modern day Pakistan).[4]
The word "Afghan" is synonymous with "Pashtun". Modern-day Pakistan was Afghanistan until the Durrand Line drawn by the British to stop the war.

>Ousted from his ancestral domains in Central Asia, Babur turned to India to satisfy his ambitions. He established himself in Kabul and then pushed steadily southward into India from Afghanistan through the Khyber Pass.[34] Babur's forces occupied much of northern India after his victory at Panipat in 1526.[34]

His grave is even in Kabul. Also Uzbeks are natives in Afghanistan if you didn't know.

ok I'm going with two scenarios here
1. you're an indian

How does it feel that your pathetic beta race has literally been enslaved by virtually everyone to have crossed the indus river? Anyone who has ventured into india has seen it as a sub continent of smelly scrawny betas who are meant to be subservient slaves, and that's quite literally what has happened throughout history - Iranics, Turkics and Europeans have all conquered india and indians at several points in history, and today, your 'people' are nothing more than smelly rapists, with a country known for 50% of its population openly defecating. How does it feel to share the same country of origin or ethnic group or cultural group with such subhumans? It's also fitting that a street shitter has images of white people (who all indians idolize and want to be like in appearance) with shit on their trousers, you love shit don't you you filthy animal.

Go drink some cow piss, street shitting monkey.

2. you're a sandnigger
how does it feel to be leeching off the success of the west where you're currently living? how does it feel to be part of a pedophiliac death cult? At the very least, if you're a muslim you can be happy you're not an indian like the scenario above but it's still pathetic that europeans and americans have effectively destroyed your entire 'civilization' without effort.

It's still way more modern than Afghanistan. Afghanistan is huge too, it would be too much of a burden.

On a scale of one to ten you seem incredibly asshurt.

You sound really buttmad, but consider this:

I live among whites. I personally know how worthless, pathetic, stupid, ugly, fat, and subhuman you are.

I know Indians make 3 times as much money as you.

I know you have no sense of hygiene, don't wash your hands before you leave a bathroom, and shit your pants whenever you get the opportunity.

I know your diet consists of greasy burgers.

And moreover I know your community college trash education didn't teach you anything about Indian history. And even if it had, you aren't smart enough to have retained it.

So basically, there's nothing you can tell me that wouldn't make me laugh in your fat, disgusting face. I'm sure you really think you're some hot shit on an imageboard for lowly white monkeys like you, but everyone in North America knows you're community college animals, who struggle to keep menial jobs.

Your "people" are barbarians who had to be civilized by Jews and Romans, because they're incapable of independent thoughts.

So learn your place.

this inferiority complex towards white tho lmao

Lmao, how did they know the GDP of a country in 1 AD?

Also, surely it is based purely on population. And China, if you count the huge landmass as it is, as "China", one state from 1 AD, of course it's going to be number 1. There was barely any technology back then.

Lo and behold, in 2008, Asia is gaining again... purely because of population.

If anything your graph shows the superiority of whites, lel.