What do you think about maharaja Ranjit Singh ji ?

[AfghanResistance]

absolutely



Ranjit Singh layed the groundwork for the expansion of the British Raj up to the Durand. The British inherited the Sikh hold on Peshawar and extended it to the other parts of Pakistan. Hes up there with Iqbal, and Jinnah, and that Chaudry fellow who wrote that pamphlet

your answer is in my previous post unless it was well beyond your comprehension.

He laid the ground work for expansion of the British Raj not up to the durrand line but in fact to the limits of peshawar. Its not rocket science.

Since everything north, west and south of peshawar was out of his control, he had no effect on what has become of today's westerly borders of Pakistan.

Also your the one who said and i quote

Amir al Ghaznavi; These Pakistanis should be very supportive and appreciative of Ranjit Singh for essentially creating their borders for him. Pakistan Pashtuns especially should honour this man as they owe their identity to him

.

Amir al Ghaznavi; There would be no Pakistan if it wasnt for Ranjit Singh. There would be no such thing as a Pakistani Pakhtun if it wasnt for Ranjt Singh

The most illogical and stupid comments that have come my way on this forum.

[Wahe Guru]

your answer is in my previous post unless it was well beyond your comprehension.

He laid the ground work for expansion of the British Raj not up to the durrand line but in fact to the limits of peshawar. Its not rocket science.

Since everything north, west and south of peshawar was out of his control, he had no effect on what has become of today's westerly borders of Pakistan.

Also your the one who said and i quote .



The most illogical and stupid comments that have come my way on this forum.

The Amir is correct. You need to think more deeply! Its no good thinking British drew the Durand line and not Ranjit Singh. British expanded on what he had started, laid the foundations of; and implemented to a good measure.

[Wahe Guru]

AR, Genghis Khan died 300 years before Sher Shah.

I think what Ghaznavi meant was that MRS' reign solidified maps of the Indus and immediately beyond. These territories which were earlier unreachable and unconquered were now much closer to a central power in Lahore or Delhi due to MRS repeated incursions. Though he didn't manage to defeat everybody there and nor did he manage to hold on for long to whatever was conquered, his efforts effectively helped define Pakistan's boundaries towards the West.

Whatever he conquered he held on to it very well but there was treachery amongst the leaders after he died. The British were going to take over after him - as Ranjit Singh had foretold. British lost some battles in Afghanistan (Afghans fought well and hard as usual) but British never wanted to take full control of Afghanistan. They were fine to keep over half the Pashtuns on their side of the line.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

your answer is in my previous post unless it was well beyond your comprehension.

He laid the ground work for expansion of the British Raj not up to the durrand line but in fact to the limits of peshawar. Its not rocket science.

Since everything north, west and south of peshawar was out of his control, he had no effect on what has become of today's westerly borders of Pakistan.

Also your the one who said and i quote .



The most illogical and stupid comments that have come my way on this forum.

Uhhhh, child.

The British took FATA, because they ALREADY HAD PESHAWAR.

They didnt ride in from DELHI to take FATA. They rode in from PESHAWAR.

They never would have been in a position to take FATA if they didnt already have PESHAWAR

They had PESHAWAR, cuz RANJIT SINGH had PESHAWAR

Before Ranjit Singh, Lar Pakhtunkhwa was united with Bar Pakhtunkhwa. After Ranjit Singh, Lar aw Bar Nayi Heh

[AfghanResistance]

Amir al Ghaznavi;578292]Uhhhh, child.

Your the child that finds even the basic's rocket science.

The British took FATA, because they ALREADY HAD PESHAWAR.

The british never took FATA. go back to school. were you hiding in the school toilets when the history lesson was in progress?.

They didnt ride in from DELHI to take FATA. They rode in from PESHAWAR.

Irrespective and irrelevant of what location they drove in from they failed to conquer FATA, just like they failed in the Malakand division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

They never would have been in a position to take FATA if they didnt already have PESHAWAR

They had Peshawar but failed in FATA etc. its obvious that it is rocket science for you. it is aparant that you lack comprehension and you lack the ability to fathom logical information.

They had PESHAWAR, cuz RANJIT SINGH had PESHAWAR

ok so the british took over peshawar because ranjit singh had peshwar but how did the rest of pakhtunkhwa and balouchistan end up in todays pakistan because ranjit singh never had either??? shows how intelligent you are!

Before Ranjit Singh, Lar Pakhtunkhwa was united with Bar Pakhtunkhwa. After Ranjit Singh, Lar aw Bar Nayi Heh

before and after rangit singh the afghans were still united and there did not exist the durrand line. lar aw bar pakhtunkhwa was one. Rangit singh died in 1839, yet the durrand line was not even drawn in the english unofficial literature up until 1893. I like teaching this child a lesson.

Lar aw Bar Nayi Heh

and what language is that? is that the language of the tajiks, hazara? or is it your mother tongue urdu because your certainly not an ethnic Afghan i.e. pakhtun.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Your the child that finds even the basic's rocket science.

The british never took FATA. go back to school. were you hiding in the school toilets when the history lesson was in progress?.

Irrespective and irrelevant of what location they drove in from they failed to conquer FATA, just like they failed in the Malakand division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

They had Peshawar but failed in FATA etc. its obvious that it is rocket science for you. it is aparant that you lack comprehension and you lack the ability to fathom logical information.


ok so the british took over peshawar because ranjit singh had peshwar but how did the rest of pakhtunkhwa and balouchistan end up in todays pakistan because ranjit singh never had either??? shows how intelligent you are!



before and after rangit singh the afghans were still united and there did not exist the durrand line. lar aw bar pakhtunkhwa was one. Rangit singh died in 1839, yet the durrand line was not even drawn in the english unofficial literature up until 1893. I like teaching this child a lesson.


and what language is that? is that the language of the tajiks, hazara? or is it your mother tongue urdu because your certainly not an ethnic Afghan i.e. pakhtun.

Child, are you trying to argue that the British Rajs borders with Afghans had nothing to do at all with Ranjit Singhs conquests before then? Is this your argument child?

Lol @ the British never took over FATA. No, they appointed Agents, bombed their villages, organized tribal paramilitaries who pledged allegiance to them, etc but never took over FATA.

Ranjit Singh is one of Pakistans founding fathers. The very reason a Pakistani Pakhtun exists today is because Ranjt Singh

[Manzareh]

The Amir is correct. You need to think more deeply! Its no good thinking British drew the Durand line and not Ranjit Singh. British expanded on what he had started, laid the foundations of; and implemented to a good measure.

The Amir is correct only because your a Sikh and you agree with him, i dont blame you its obvious. AR has flawed your logic in his posts here but you choose to ignore the ones you have no answer for and cherry pick your answers.

Ranjit never drew the line the pashtuns didnt see any line or recognize it till the British did the job in an attempt of divide and conquer as they tried in previous wars to beat the Pashtun in vain.

Dont you get it, Ranjit Singh would not have had any influence or even been anything near formidable force if it wasnt for the Europeans - they trained thousands of soldiers in his army and were also governors in high ranks across the region. They had to unite with each other against a single race that they could not defeat. Ranjit Singh only pushed the Pashtuns back but all sikhs are taught that he conquered Afghanistan.

[Manzareh]

Uhhhh, child.

The British took FATA, because they ALREADY HAD PESHAWAR.


They didnt ride in from DELHI to take FATA. They rode in from PESHAWAR.

They never would have been in a position to take FATA if they didnt already have PESHAWAR

They had PESHAWAR, cuz RANJIT SINGH had PESHAWAR

Before Ranjit Singh, Lar Pakhtunkhwa was united with Bar Pakhtunkhwa. After Ranjit Singh, Lar aw Bar Nayi Heh

At the point were the British took FATA was Ranjit Singh directly involved?? no ovcourse. being a chain reaction for the British does not make you responsible for future accomplishments it only makes you a reason and tool. With your logic it would be right to assume that Sikhs and Ranjit owe there identity's to invading armies coming through the Khyber Pass into the Indian sub-continent for over eight centuries.

[Manzareh]

Whatever he conquered he held on to it very well but there was treachery amongst the leaders after he died. The British were going to take over after him - as Ranjit Singh had foretold. British lost some battles in Afghanistan (Afghans fought well and hard as usual) but British never wanted to take full control of Afghanistan. They were fine to keep over half the Pashtuns on their side of the line.

What rubbish is this! The British didnt want to take control of Afghanistan????, do your research - they exhausted all there efforts in 3 separate wars to take Afghanistan,

in the 1830's the British were established in Peshawar, they pushed Ranjit to the side and made it part of their game. they tried taking Pashtun lands what did this result in?? it resulted in the entire force being massacred by the Pashtuns in FATA, i dont see how that would make them comfortable or "..fine to keep over half the Pashtuns on their side of the line" as you put it. to regain there dignity after they were defeated they retreated and the next thing they done instead was conquer the Sikh kingdom in Punjab!!


And if your talking about the conquest of Ranjit Singh - the Sikhs alone or the British, French, Italian etc even american leaders and also many Muslims (which was the force of Ranjit Singh at the time) could not defeat or invade the Pashtuns neither could the British alone without help the only option to invade the Pashuns was to stick together. kinda like the situation the past 10 years against the Pashtun in which 42 joint countries are doing the same thing and once again not able to.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

At the point were the British took FATA was Ranjit Singh directly involved?? no ovcourse. being a chain reaction for the British does not make you responsible for future accomplishments it only makes you a reason and tool. With your logic it would be right to assume that Sikhs and Ranjit owe there identity's to invading armies coming through the Khyber Pass into the Indian sub-continent for over eight centuries.

exactly

[AfghanResistance]

Manzareh said the following and the writing in bold is what Amir al Ghaznavi highlighted.

At the point were the British took FATA was Ranjit Singh directly involved?? no ovcourse. being a chain reaction for the British does not make you responsible for future accomplishments it only makes you a reason and tool. With your logic it would be right to assume that Sikhs and Ranjit owe there identity's to invading armies coming through the Khyber Pass into the Indian sub-continent for over eight centuries.

You then responded by confirming that is your logic and opinion, by saying the following.

exactly

So now your saying that the sikhs owe their identity to us Afghans etc. Wahe Guru. what do you have to say now about your friend. you look a bit stupid now, dont you. Instead of engaging in a logical debate you just tend to side with whoever says one thing good about ranjit singh. We are not against rangit snigh or sikhs, nor hate him. We love bravery and honour and we give credit and praise where we see it but we never exaggerate the accomplishments of anyone and that includes rangit singh.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Manzareh said the following and the writing in bold is what Amir al Ghaznavi highlighted.



You then responded by confirming that is your logic and opinion, by saying the following.


So now your saying that the sikhs owe their identity to us Afghans etc. Wahe Guru. what do you have to say now about your friend. you look a bit stupid now, dont you. Instead of engaging in a logical debate you just tend to side with whoever says one thing good about ranjit singh. We are not against rangit snigh or sikhs, nor hate him. We love bravery and honour and we give credit and praise where we see it but we never exaggerate the accomplishments of anyone and that includes rangit singh.

Sikh identity and culture is absolutely influenced by the Islamic invasions from the West. Absolutely. You wont find a single Sikh who will disagree

[Manzareh]

^ Ok so all Sikhs agree that they owe their identity to Muslims?

on the contrary i seriously doubt you will find a single Sikh that will say "We owe our identity to Muslims" c'mon now that a pretty deep thing to put into everysingle Sikhs mouth, i dont think Wahe Guru will be pleased with that statement.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

^ Ok so all Sikhs agree that they owe their identity to Muslims?

on the contrary i seriously doubt you will find a single Sikh that will say "We owe our identity to Muslims" c'mon now that a pretty deep thing to put into everysingle Sikhs mouth, i dont think Wahe Guru will be pleased with that statement.

Hey facts are uncomfortable. The Sikh religion is thoroughly influenced by Islam, their first Guru even went to Hajj. The culture of the Sikhs is defined by their resistence to Mughal/Afghan oppression. Any Sikh will accept this as truth,

[Wahe Guru]

The Amir is correct only because your a Sikh and you agree with him, i dont blame you its obvious. AR has flawed your logic in his posts here but you choose to ignore the ones you have no answer for and cherry pick your answers.

Ranjit never drew the line the pashtuns didnt see any line or recognize it till the British did the job in an attempt of divide and conquer as they tried in previous wars to beat the Pashtun in vain.

Dont you get it, Ranjit Singh would not have had any influence or even been anything near formidable force if it wasnt for the Europeans - they trained thousands of soldiers in his army and were also governors in high ranks across the region. They had to unite with each other against a single race that they could not defeat. Ranjit Singh only pushed the Pashtuns back but all sikhs are taught that he conquered Afghanistan.

Sikhs are never taught that Ranjit Singh conquered Afghanistan or he drew a line. Everyone knows he expelled Afghan rulers from Punjab and Kashmir and he took Peshawar too from Afghans and he conquered some areas which are now part of KP province. He took control of Khyber pass and he reached as far as Jamrud which I think is in FATA.

Nobody is saying that he vanquished the Afghans but who would you say had the upper hand? Obviously it was him as he took territories from the Afghans.
Agreed he hired Europeans to train his troops as he was able to recognise their techniques were superior. But this he did later in his rule after his rule had been established in most of the territory that he controlled.

He was not united with the British. They hemmed him in and prevented him from expanding his rule any further e.g. he wanted to go east of river Sutlej to take control of Eastern Punjab from other Sikh rulers and the British prevented that. He wanted to go into Sindh and again British prevented that.

"race that they could not defeat" - then how did British end up ruling half of the Pashtun population?