Perfect specimen of a brown Indonesian Man of Golden Race

http://www.sportanews.com/wp-content/uploads/Muhammad-Isman-Thoyib_beritaldii1.jpg

6'2 Vietnamese man representing the Indu male beauty standard

http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z361/gray2607/PhamAnhTuan.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UIiacMLsDuc/UmYhWr4dXlI/AAAAAAAASQ0/hJNkTVcubYQ/s1600/pham+anh+tuan+26.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hbAVXIzdFQU/UmYi0UEjJcI/AAAAAAAASSU/IidcfUk7smA/s1600/pham+anh+tuan+45.jpg

Carotene Brown Skinned Superior Isan Thai Man Buakaw Banchamek of the Superior Mongoloid Race

https://pp.vk.me/c315724/v315724055/8c37/LOx2MJ7tdgc.jpg

You are our slaves. Serve the Chinggiscock. Pretty up your sister for me, puny nigger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_name

"Khan is also a name used commonly among Pashtuns, though it is not native to the Pashtun language and was adopted by Pashtuns via cross cultural exchanges between Turko-Mongol peoples and the Pashtuns when the Pashtun lands were ruled by Mongol peoples and the Turk people. Khan also means king or leader or strong or royal etc., which could be another reason for its adoption. Mostly Khan is used by those pashtuns who have served Turko-Mongol rulers over central Asia and south Asia"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal_Empire

Your lord and master and bull: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Emperor_babur.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tughlaq_Dynasty

Humayuns caucasoid cumslut: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamida_Banu_Begum

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/The_Emperor_Humayun_Returning_from_a_Journey_Greets_his_Son.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Babur_and_Humayun.jpg

too bad the genes of your inferior caucasoid race made a physically inferior Akbar. at least he had that hybrid vigour going for him.

http://imageweb-cdn.magnoliasoft.net/britishlibrary/supersize/a80028-30.jpg

puny nigger, we were your rolemodels. idolize your glorious hero timur. send us your beautiful girls and we will bless you with names like khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timur_Shah_Durrani

Abdali Pashtuns are the descendants of Hepthalites. The Hephtalites were slaves to the Rouran Mongols, the Goktürk and Western Turks You were cucks to the Chinese as well. it is in your nature to be subservient to the Golden Man, the Golden God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephthalite_Empire#Origins

MongoloidManIranianfemale mixed race Turkmen Nader Shah who idolized Genghis and Timur ruled Persia as Mongoloid Golden God

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Nader_Shah_Afshar.jpg

Know whats funny? when the mongol invaded persia, the ruling dynasty wasnt even caucasoid iranic. they were turks. qutuz of egypt was a khwarezmian. going from golden mongoloid master to golden mongoloid master. such is the fate of the caucasoids.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Khwarezmia_and_Eastern_Iran

"There has only been one race to totally dominate and subjugate the indian subcontinent, and that was us glorious Caucasoid Pashtuns. We would have taken over chink land too if you guys didnt smell like cat piss and fish shit."

thing is you never dominated or conquered anything, puny nigger

---

Great armies of the Mongoloid Man

http://historum.com/asian-history/88853-comparison-ming-mughal-japanese-militaries-1590s.html

1) Japanese armies:

Japanese arquebuses were actually better designed and the gunners adopted superior tactics compared to the European army. Logistically, musket bore was standardized and could be replaced readily. They are also lighter than their European counterparts and a lacquer was created as cover to enable firing a matchlock during the rain. There were far more arquebus in Japan than any European countries or even a combination of them.

Tactically, the Japanese were the first army to use linear tactics that emphasized offensive firepower down to the company level over melee in the form of pike, whereas Spanish armies were still using the pike dominated relatively inflexible Tercio. Spanish gunners did not volley fire and each soldiers fired on an individual basis. The Dutch and later Swedes were ahead of the Spanish in that the former adopted a defensive 10 rank line tactic while Gustavus only introduced volley fire in the thirty years war and decimated the Tercio. Japanese formations under Nobunaga were able to adopt three line rank rotation fires, giving superior firepower over the contemporary Dutch 10 rank formations, and used offensive firing tactics which was at least half a century ahead of similar European formations.

The Japanese army also probably had superior hand to hand melee ability in short weaponry compared to the Europeans. Yu Dayou casually dismissed the Europeans as having inferior melee in naval confrontations and used boarding as the standard tactic against them; "these people's only weapon is a soft sword, their naval combat ability is inferior to our soldiers, and on the ground, long spears would have subdued them." On the other hand, Qi Jiguang often avoided confronting Japanese pirates in close confined melee at all costs and used rattan shields and bamboo spearmen specifically designed to beat them (along with adopting their own tactics). The emphasis on plate armor is a bit misleading, as the majority of European infantries wore Corselet and Brigandine armor (mainly 15th century) just like the Ming soldiers, who often got the worst end of the deal in close spaced melee with the Japanese and their longer swords.

Only in cavalry and artillery were Japanese army inferior as the horses in the island did not allow heavy cavalry charges and many fought as mounted infantrymen. This became apparent when they fought the Chinese in the Imjin war. However, field artillery actually played a very minor role in 16th century European warfare and cavalry in most of the 16th century were often more skirmishers that lacked shock power.

2) Chinese armies:

In contrast to Japanese, Chinese cavalry warfare was far more experienced and tactically more efficient compared to even contemporary European ones. Heavy shock cavalry armed in mail and lance played decisive roles in the Ming army, whereas mounted gunmen in the form of Caracoles was the preferred European tactic until the very end of the 16th century. Only the Polish and the Swedes under Gustavus discarded Caracoles and adopted lancers and routed the former as a result. In addition to heavy lancers, Ming Mounted archers were superior to the Caracole gun units that played a similar tactical role in 16th century European cavalry warfare. For one, the caracoles can only stop to fire whereas Ming mounted archers could gallop and fire at the same time. The former became a static target which was highly vulnerable to cavalry assault. This was evident when battle of Mookerheyde when 400 Spanish lancers routed an entire 2,000 German unit when the later was reloading. The Ming mounted archers fought in disciplined conjunction with the lancers and whereas the Caracoles would most likely be annihilated against a superior arquebus infantry formation because of the latter's superior fireopower, the Ming cavalry could often outmaneuver Japanese arquebusers in the Imjin war, and was one of the reasons for the Ming victory at Chiksan, and Korean sources recorded that "the Japanese feared Ming cavalry".

In the field of artillery, the idea that European armies were ahead is also simplistic. First, heavy cannons were rarely adopted for battlefield and was more of a siege weapon. The Spanish were the first to mount cannons on wheels and their cannons were usually no more than a heavy shotgun. Yet in the area of light artillery for field combat, the Chinese arguably outperformed the Europeans. It is highly probable that Chinese units since the late Ming had more cannons per personnel than European armies down to the 18th century, the Ming soldiers were already commonly equipped with field cannons in the Imjin war (something which I have yet to come across when reading l6th century European warfare). Typical Chinese infantries had 10 cannons per 1,000 soldiers in the 17th and 18th century whereas Europeans only had 1 and at most 6 again under the reforms of Gustavus.

Ming field cannons were behind in heavy cannons for siege but were probably better designed than their European counterparts in light artillery. In 1585, Juan de Mendoca described Ming cannon as "of huge greatness, and better made than ours". Furthermore in the wars against Li Zicheng's rebellion in the 1630s, gazeteers of Suzhou showed that gunners using telescope to spot targets, which predates its use in Europe. In the 1620s, even in the field of heavy artillery, the Ming caught up when they introduced large Hongyi cannons and briefly surpassed European designs when they created lighter iron cored cannons.

Northern Chinese units still relied on composite bows, but southern Chinese units were increasing their use of muskets and Qi Jiguang's manuals showed that over 50% of the men were armed with muskets, which was comparable to the percentage of musketeers in contemporary tercio units.

---

Puny indu nigger slave race. Your destiny is to be the lowliest subservient cuck to the Mongoloid Man God.