Why were Muslims so cruel and ruthless in the Indian Subcontinent

Technically it was the Mughals, other Indians. So an entirely different group of folk. As for why, I dont know, emulation of Genghis?

>>2177105
Cruelty isn't something you do for fun and recreation, it is a punishment for insubordination.
Some places rebelled more, and were thus punished more.

>>2177147
Yeah, basically this The mughal army consisted of Pashtuns(martial race) and descendants of Genghis Khan. Did you really expect it to be anything less?

Subcontinent full of idolatrous polytheists.

Didn't they eliminate buddhism from India forever?

>>2177193
Yeah, they put the nail in the coffin.

Egypt and Syria were Christians so their existence was permitted by the Koran, provided they pay the jizya.

India was pagan so had the choice of converting or death.

>>2177216
Initially perhaps, in order to push into India proper; however, it was eventually extended to the hindus via Islamic jurisprudence community of that time deeming it so. There are still hindus in North India who were subjects to the mughal empire.

>>2177156
>Cruelty isn't something you do for fun and recreation
lol

KHAN'D

>>2177193
>>2177201
There's 8 million buddhists in India, but it's true there used to be a fuckton more

Hindus are not people of the book according to Islam and therefore they have basically no rights or anything and are all to be killed, enslaved and converted.

1. The Mughals had central Asian morality which was always more cruel
2. The Indians were Hindus, polytheists, not people of the book and by having many gods were ardent enemies of Islam
3. The Indians didn't submit easily and put up much resistance leading to harsh put downs and bitter ethnic/sectarian rivalries.

>>2177156
>he never played Victoria
>he never recruited an entire army in a conquered region, mostly africa
>he never took them to some island and cut off all suplies to leave them there
pleb

>>2177105
The Arabs who took Syria and Egypt were mostly long time soldiers of Rome who decided to take their pay directly from the existing tax machine once the wars were over and they weren't getting paid any more.

The Mughals were Mongols leading Turks who made their living raiding others for loot and slaves.

Pagans vs people of the book, believe or otherwise the latter are treated less poorly.

>>2177105
Because it is a savage religion of Arabs.

>>2180051
Indonesia

File: how-much-should-the-quran-influence-our-countrys-laws_1.png (19KB, 638x486px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 638x486px

>>2180094
Being well-behaved doesn't mean they don't abide with the tribal barbarism Islamism entails.

>>2179709
>playing a video game badly means cruelty is recreational

>>2177193
No, Buddhism had died out long before the Mughals arrived.

>>2179372
>1. The Mughals had central Asian morality which was always more cruel

Well yeah, Babur was direct descendant of Timur the Lame.

That's the price you have to pay for learning to use the loo. As for Syria, I hope you know it was one of the slowest transitioning Islamic countries in the world. Despite its proximity to Muslims it had more Christians for centuries. Egyptians willingly left Christianity. The fact that more than 6M Copts are cohabitants to a 91% Muslim country is an indicating factor

File: Mughal India-26.jpg (311KB, 1574x1200px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1574x1200px

>>2177105
>Be Mughal Dynasty.
>Persianate as fuck.
>Cultivated Muslim aristocracy.
>Swag
>Hygiene.

>Go to India because steppeshits ousted you from your land and India's easy to conquer.
>EVERYONE
>SHITS
>ON THE STREETS
>Worship weird things.
I'd lose my shit too.

>>2177105
Ottomans weren't that nice either.

>>2182301
Haha