India Part of Greater Middle East?

And others are mixed. In Islamabad, to the North is C Asia, to the south, S Asia,

Pakistan was ruled by Mid East and C Asian based empires for most of its history pre-Islam. Indeed the last 300 years of being tied to India are counter to the norm.

Edited by Sparten - 06-Oct-2007 at 18:44

Originally posted by Sparten Pakistan was ruled by Mid East and C Asian based empires for most of its history pre-Islam. Indeed the last 300 years of being tied to India are counter to the norm.   Certainly Egypt should be Mid East. But then Egypt also has a lot of Med  and N African influence. It is like Pakistan, a nation that cannot be placed in one area.

Edited by andrew - 06-Oct-2007 at 18:55

How was Egypt not a major player in the Middle East? It traded extensively with them importing Phoenician cedars and Levantine pots and pans for wheat and papyrus since the earliest times! It adveresly influenced the Middle East and vice-versa and became assimilated to the Middle East since very early. The imperialist ambitions of Egypt had nothing to do with Egypt being a 'major player' in Middle East affairs considering it was part of it the entire time. Also Egypt was the only civilization, besides Mesopatamia, in the Middle East. Pakistan was originally South Asian and was only considered Middle East with the advancement of Islam into the region simple as that. Even since the earliest times before the New Kingdom Egypt extended its domain from Nubia to Palestine and influenced Phoenician art to this very day. The idea of using columns to support building seen in Persia, Phoenicia, and Asia Minor, yeah ah started in Egypt!

Edited by andrew - 06-Oct-2007 at 19:29

Originally posted by Sparten The Indus Valley also traded with the middles east. And before Islam, the Kushans, the Indo-Sassanids, the Bactrian Greeks and the Persians all ruled here. Pakistans links with the Mid East and C Asia go back to at least 500 BV and probably before if you count the Aryans. As for the national flag of Pakistan, its not a Pan Arab color, the flag is based on the pre-partition Muslim League flag which was based upon the Turkish flag which was due to the Leagues active support of the Turkish cause in WWI and after the treaty of severs,.

Edited by andrew - 06-Oct-2007 at 19:47

I think that geographically , historically, and ethnically  India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Iran could all be considered Central Asian. They are all inhabited predominantly by Indoaryan peoples and have some cultural similarities. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan have historical associations, and Iran and Afghanistan have historical associations. Sri Lanka is a little different but it also has associations with southern India and could be considered part of Central Asia.

India is not a country it is a continent. The N W Part has more links with say C Asia the S E part more with E Asia.

Originally posted by Conservative Geographically Iran is apart of West or Southwest Asia, not Central Asia. As for India being in Central Asia you are way off. The Indian subcontinent is its own geographical region and India/Pakistan/Bangladesh are all apart of it. Only Pakistan's Baluchestan is apart of the Iranian plateau and so can be considered to fall in West Asia. But overall as a country Pakistan is in South Asia (for political, historical and cultural/ethnic reasons).   Afghanistan in my opinion could fall into either West Asia or Central Asia for political and cultral/ethnic reasons. Although historically Afghanistan (in particular western Afghanistan such as Herat) has been apart of the Iranian civilization and shares close linguistic and cultural/ethnic relations with us.   Perhaps with the exception of the Pashtuns in the southeast there is nothing Afghanistan has in common with Pakistanis/Indians/Bangladesh in any of those areas you mentioned lol... and the Afghans only share a relationship with South Asia because some of their Pashtun kin now form apart of Pakistan.   By the way Indian/Pakistan/Bangladesh are predominantly Dravidian (racially) whereas Central Asia is now predominantly Turkic. There is absolutely no similarity between the two so i dont know on what basis you are labelling everything it seems from Sri Lanka to Iran to be "Central Asian".

Very true. This region is a subcontinent of it's own.

A simple way to find out  the truth is to look at the meaning of the word when it was coined & it's interpretation by the people who invented the term. They didn't ever mean to include this region in Central Asia or mid east.