Now you’re changing your point. You first claimed that common Indians suffered under the rule of the invaders. However, now that I’ve pointed out that common Indians suffered the same under local Hindu kings, you’re changing your argument to claim that the “invaders” destroyed Indian culture (whatever that is).
“Indian culture” wouldn’t be what it is today without the various foreign influences brought in by successive waves rulers. Indian language, literature, art, architecture, music, cuisine, etc all bear the mark of the “invaders”. Without their Central Asian cultural influences there would be no Hindi/Hindustani language, some of India’s greatest and most emblematic monuments would never have been built, Indian music would have no sitars, sarods, or santoors, and no one in India would have heard of mehndi, shalvar qameez, kurta payjamas, etc. I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point.
You’re contradicting yourself. Babur and Humayoun were both foreign-born invaders. They are also not particularly admired in Indian society. If they were admired, why do Hindus often try to insult Indian Muslims by referring to them as Babur ki aulaad?