Historic Hindu Temple Inaugurated in India on site of Mosque

[Novus America]

There are more Turks in Istanbul/Constantinople than there are Greeks in Greece.

So obviously not going to happen.

I’m sure some Russians and other devout Christians could populate Constantinople to outnumber and eventually outpower the resident Turks.

And now we are getting into population transfers and all sorts of issues. It is not going to happen.
That option was lost in 1922. Greece does not have the military, political and demographic capabilities fir such a feat. Although that is another topic.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Now if only Greece leads another crusade to retake Constantinople and Hagia Sophia…

Sign me the fuck up for that.

[Greed and Death]

To be fair, Al-Aqsa is much more complicated than this, since it’s the third holiest in Islam, and the site of Muhammad’s "Night Journey" and all that. Babri Masjid on the other hand has no significance in Islam and was built purely to insult Hindus

Eh debatable as there is nothing to actually indicate the Night Journey involved Jerusalem (the Quaran does not mention Jerusalem at all in in the Night Journey passages) the Jerusalem theory of its location was created later probably for political reasons. But sure many Muslims do still believe it was the location of the Night Journey.

But yes certainly more complicated than this particular mosque. Which was apparently not even in use at the time it was destroyed and was not a particularly notable or important mosque and was built just a sign of Islamic imperial domination.

So naturally after Muslim apartheid rule ended, many Hindus wanted it gone.

So you mean the mosque wasn't even in use when it was torn down ?

How are they even getting worked up about it then ? A We aren't using it but you can't either attitude ? Bloody children kicking the ball into the woods.

[-Astoria-]

But yes certainly more complicated than this particular mosque. Which was apparently not even in use at the time it was destroyed

Really?

[Novus America]

But yes certainly more complicated than this particular mosque. Which was apparently not even in use at the time it was destroyed

Really?

“In the 1990s, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) campaigned to reclaim the sites of the mosques that they believe were constructed after demolition of Hindu temples. After the demolition of the Babri mosque in December 1992, about a thousand policemen were deployed to prevent a similar incident at the Gyanvapi mosque site.[19] The Bharatiya Janata Party leaders, who supported the demand for "reclaiming" Babri mosque, opposed VHP's similar demand for Gyanvapi, on the grounds that it was an actively used mosque.[20]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyanvapi_Mosque

So it appears there are at least two such mosques in dispute, but the BJP only supported “reclaiming” the one not in use. They opposed doing the same thing for a mosque that was in use, in the grounds it was in use, indicating the Bahri one was not even in active use as a mosque at the time.

[Aclion]

So you mean the mosque wasn't even in use when it was torn down ?

How are they even getting worked up about it then ? A We aren't using it but you can't either attitude ? Bloody children kicking the ball into the woods.

Literally the whole point of building these mosques is to facilitate genocide.

[Greed and Death]

Really?

“In the 1990s, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) campaigned to reclaim the sites of the mosques that they believe were constructed after demolition of Hindu temples. After the demolition of the Babri mosque in December 1992, about a thousand policemen were deployed to prevent a similar incident at the Gyanvapi mosque site.[19] The Bharatiya Janata Party leaders, who supported the demand for "reclaiming" Babri mosque, opposed VHP's similar demand for Gyanvapi, on the grounds that it was an actively used mosque.[20]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyanvapi_Mosque

So it appears there are at least two such mosques in dispute, but the BJP only supported “reclaiming” the one not in use. They opposed doing the same thing for a mosque that was in use, in the grounds it was in use, indicating the Bahri one was not even in active use as a mosque at the time.

For Bahri it makes sense as the local community is only ~5% Muslim. It is very likely they could not support or maintain a mosque that large.

[-Astoria-]

So it appears there are at least two such mosques in dispute, but the BJP only supported “reclaiming” the one not in use. They opposed doing the same thing for a mosque that was in use, in the grounds it was in use, indicating the Bahri one was not even in active use as a mosque at the time.

1949 Hindu activists associated with the Hindu Mahasabha surreptitiously placed idols of Rama inside the mosque, after which the government locked the building to avoid further disputes.

Basically, it was in disuse because it was under dispute, & not because no one was using it.

[Novus America]

So it appears there are at least two such mosques in dispute, but the BJP only supported “reclaiming” the one not in use. They opposed doing the same thing for a mosque that was in use, in the grounds it was in use, indicating the Bahri one was not even in active use as a mosque at the time.

1949 Hindu activists associated with the Hindu Mahasabha surreptitiously placed idols of Rama inside the mosque, after which the government locked the building to avoid further disputes.

Basically, it was in disuse because it was under dispute, & not because no one was using it.

Well by definition if it was in disuse no one was using it.
Regardless of WHY they were not using it.

Disuse means not in use.

Still it was not actually being used as a mosque.

[Qihein]

Good for India, symbols of oppression should be torn down. I wish it would easier getting rid of oppressive symbols in the U.S like Confederate and Christopher Columbus statues

[-Astoria-]

Well by definition if it was in disuse no one was using it.
Regardless of WHY they were not using it.

Disuse means not in use.

Still it was not actually being used as a mosque.

Yes; however, as I understand it the debate over it was still not yet completed at the time of its destruction.

[Novus America]

Well by definition if it was in disuse no one was using it.
Regardless of WHY they were not using it.

Disuse means not in use.

Still it was not actually being used as a mosque.

Yes; however, as I understand it the debate over it was still not yet completed at the time of its destruction.

True. It was still in dispute at the time. While I do not support vigilante destruction, now the courts have ruled the Hindus should have it. And the destruction is fait acompli.

[The Hindustani State]

Yes it would have been preferable for a peaceful resolution where the Hindus got their holy site back and Muslims have their temple moved preferably at state expense or BJP expense.

What about the Buddhists?

Many critics also claim that the present-day Ayodhya was originally a Buddhist site, based on its identification with Saketa described in Buddhist texts. According to historian Romila Thapar, ignoring the Hindu mythological accounts, the first historic mention of the city dates back to the 7th century, when the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang described it as a Buddhist site.

Buddhism and Hinduism were syncretic in the region for a long time, the Buddhists are supporting the construction of Ram Mandir. So again, please tell me why it should be neutral?

[Baltenstein]

Our imaginary friend showed your imaginary friend who's boss.

[The Hindustani State]

Have they considered, like, not fucking building anything there?

Hell, Indian Muslims are like some of the chillest Muslims there are, and if they're annoyed about this then you know you done fucked up.

What?

[Major-Tom]

Sounds like one of those petty dick moves that could escalate into something else. Bad.

[Dangine]

I support this move. Sadly it will cause more conflict between Muslims and Hindus though.

[Region of Dwipantara]

I support this move. Sadly it will cause more conflict between Muslims and Hindus though.

So does this means the potential conflicts are acceptable or...

[Region of Dwipantara]

Our imaginary friend showed your imaginary friend who's boss.

Yes, but more importantly, please vote for this party and not that other one.

[Risottia]

Now if only Greece leads another crusade to retake Constantinople and Hagia Sophia…

And the Roman Empire with the Europe, North Africa, and some parts of Asia, now that's actually not a bad scenario

Do we finally get to restore the worship of the real Trinity Iuppiter, Mars and Quirinus and to remove the Middle-Eastern unEuropean superstitions?

[Risottia]

Our imaginary friend showed your imaginary friend who's boss.

Yes, but more importantly, please vote for this party and not that other one.

If you vote for the wrong party my imaginary friend will beat you up for eternity.

[Aclion]

I support this move. Sadly it will cause more conflict between Muslims and Hindus though.

So does this means the potential conflicts are acceptable or...

"every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement"

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

-snip-

What was that rant about? Did you have to bring in your tangent for going against woke leftists?

---

I largely approve of such a move considering the mosque barely has any significance to the Muslims (especially that it’s closed) and the building was apparently there to mock the Hindus, while Hindus can trace the importance back to one of their two most important epics, Ramayana, since it determined that Ayodhya was the location where the local king and queen birthed and raised the incarnation of Rama assigned to end the oppression of the demon king Ravana. While I’m not necessarily happy about the mosque being torn down, the mosque only really had the purpose of flipping off Hindus for centuries to come and was out of use anyways.

[Aureumterra]

Have they considered, like, not fucking building anything there?

Hell, Indian Muslims are like some of the chillest Muslims there are, and if they're annoyed about this then you know you done fucked up.

What?

Gotta be woke and virtue signal, even though you’ve never likely once set foot in India

[The Hindustani State]

What?

Gotta be woke and virtue signal, even though you’ve never likely once set foot in India

I remember seeing this thing about a college protest in the US to "free" Kashmir, most of the protestors were white liberals who’ve never been to India, the interviewer went up to this guy (who was really stereotypical, with died hair and piercings everywhere), and asked him why he was protesting. The guy said "to free Kashmiri Muslims oppressed by India."

The journalist then asked about the Kashmiri Pundits, the Hindus who were exiled from the area, he said "I don’t know, they sound like something the Indian government made up."