It's all by design, sure they live on the same (sub) continent but none of the true Asians want anything to do with the pajeets.
A Japanese, hell even a Chinese or Korean would never want to be associated with these "people". But they're "Asian" so the comfortable whites will create their own cognitive dissonance and let them all in.
We did all this on the last forum.. all of it. Its like the Jordan Peterson thread where people are still debating whether he is "just confused" and being exploited when all the receipts for him being a long term plant is there on the first page of the thread.
You in particular are always punching down on White people in Anglo countries that are not your own for being stupid and weak or gullible or simply charging you too much money for their labour. Its a very Jewish trait.
To summarise:
The debate raged on the last forum.
On one side naming Pakistanis Indians and Bangladeshis as "Asian" was a government psy op. as discussed above.
On the other side people argued that it is a simple equation as to how many people from the whole Asian landmass are in your country.
In America - with its Pacific coast, its history of Korean immigration post Korean War, ARVN families post Vietnam War, its Colonial History in the Philippines, its Japanese and Hapa population in places like Hawaii and California, imported Rothschild Coolies building the railroads, the origin of the phrase "slumming it" being organised middle class tours of the Chinese slums in places like San Francisco, - any mention of "Asians" and a vision of oriental East Asians immediately springs to mind.
In the UK with its history of Colonial involvement in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh and its history of Kalergi in migration by these groups - say the word "Asian" and people will immediately think of Sikhs, Muslims or Hindus.
They argued it was just a question of which Asian groups were the majority in your country - East Orientals from Eastern Asia or brown people from South West Asia.
I was a child in the UK in the 1970s and 1980s and "Asian" always meant Sikhs, Muslims, Hindus (the UKs mainly Cantonese Asian population was comparatively very small).
People pushing this viewpoint pulled up all these song lyrics from the 1960s and 1970s about the "Asians at the curry house" or "that Asian with his turban".
If the term Asian for brown people IS a government psy-op **(and I wouldn't put that past a government that has the Tavistock Institute at its disposal)** then it has to date back to at least the 1960s when all these Kashmiris and Punjabis and Pathans first started pouring in and appearing on British high streets.. because Asian meaning Brown has always been the case in the UK since they first started appearing - so a government psy-op from its very inception,
and nothing recent as many doubled down during the Last long debate on the Last forum.
Personally I like Confucius' demand that there be a 'rectification of terms' and the correct words for the correct items be employed.
Therefore I would like Kamala Harris to be renamed a "mixed jewish-Indian terrorist-concubine harpy' and the term "Asian" to be only applied exclusively to paler slant eyed East Asians .. and not the Indian subcontinent populations.