Following China's example, Indian netizens are hotly discussing whether the construction of the Great Wall of India can resist foreign invasion?
I have a doubt about India.
In northern India, it is surrounded by majestic mountain ranges that act as a natural barrier. However, between the Hindu Kush and the Suleymani Mountains, there is a narrow passage known as the Khyber Pass.
This passage has witnessed countless wars and invasions – the Aryans, the Persians, Alexander the Great, the Arab Empire, and the Mongol horsemen all passed through this pass to set foot on Indian soil.
This makes me wonder why the ancient Indians did not build a strong Great Wall at the crucial Khyber Pass to defend against foreign invasions, as the ancient Chinese did.
Let's take a look at what netizens think of this issue?
Netizen Anilkumar pointed out:
They didn't have to work to build the Great Wall. They have succeeded in annexing Sikkim and spreading their military power throughout the region.
What's more, Britain has crossed the ocean and colonized India for 200 years, which fully proves the importance of maritime defense.
Similarly, the issue of Pakistan to the west highlights this. Therefore, it is undoubtedly a waste to invest resources in the construction of the Great Wall in the north.
Netizen Susanna said:
As a land power, India plays an important role.
Like China, it once held an important position on the world stage.
Historically, neither the Mongols nor the Persians have been able to conquer India by land. On the contrary, it was the British who succeeded in occupying India by sea.
网友Southerner：
The Afghans are located in western India, and they have made several attempts to cross the Indus River to invade India.
However, they were successfully repelled by the Indians in the 14th, 15th, 18th, and 1919 centuries, a total of eight times. This speaks volumes about the importance of the Indus Defense.
Netizen Rashid said:
India did not begin its history as a unified state, but was made up of multiple kingdoms that were at war with each other. It was the Mughals, and then the British, that unified India into a single country to administer.
Netizen Fariquo pointed out:
Afghan Mahmoud Ghazni swept through India in the 90s, also by land.
He stressed that India has never been a superpower and that its GDP is largely dependent on the abundance of agricultural products produced as a tropical country.
Netizen Eldorado mentioned:
The Mughals conquered India by land, especially Babur, the founder of the empire.
They achieved this with the assistance of the Safavid Empire. The Safavids ruled present-day Iran and were descendants of Persia.
Netizen AMathur said:
The reunification of India is not so simple. It was a merger of a lot of small countries, so our culture was very similar from north to south.
Although there have been many kings, they all know to unite against the enemy from outside. It took many years for foreign enemies to invade India.
Netizen Belever has a different opinion:
Unlike China, India has never been a complete country. There are a lot of small countries vying for turf.
No single Indian king was able to truly rule the entire country. It also gives other countries the opportunity to conquer and dominate India.
Netizen Haroopin thinks:
- It is difficult for India to unify into a big country, so they also do not have the ability to build something like the Great Wall.
- Building the Great Wall is not an easy task. If you look at that place on the map, you can't farm at all, you have to bring food from somewhere else.
- India does not come every year with an enemy, almost once every 200 years. Therefore, it is impossible for the soldiers on the Great Wall to be idle for 200 years.