Pakistan - The Pathans

[UnitedPak]

This was posted on PDF. Its pretty good imo.


YouTube - Pakistan - The Pathans

 

[roadrunner]

Nice, passion rising clip. However, there's one or two inaccuracies, such as the Pathans descending from Khalid Bin Walid. The clips of the young kids carrying rifles reminds me of that scene from The 9th Company where the kid shoots the patrolman.

 

[Awesome]

Video is no longer availale .

I wanted to raise my passions too

 

[Neo]

Video is no longer availale .

I wanted to raise my passions too

Huh?
I'm watching it now!

 

[UnitedPak]

Video is no longer availale .

I wanted to raise my passions too

The vid is called "Pakistan - The Pathans", just search for it on Youtube. There are several copies.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Wow!

Powerful stuff.

Quite emotional.

 

[EagleEyes]

Pakistan Zindabad.

 

[Moin91]

brilliant video......

 

[Skywalker]

It brought tears into my eyes especially when I saw our great hero Capt. Sher Khan. May Allah give him the highest place in heaven.

 

[Vinod2070]

Not sure why the battle of SARAGARHI is not mentioned!

The battle
Sikh soldier in ceremonial turban, Indian Army
Sikh soldier in ceremonial turban, Indian Army

Details of the Battle of Saraghari are considered fairly accurate, due to Gurmukh Singh signalling events to Fort Lockhart as they occurred.[5]

* Around 9.00am, around 10,000 Afghans reach the signaling post at Saragarhi.
* Sardar Gurmukh Singh signals to Col. Haughton, situated in Fort Lockhart, that they are under attack.
* Colonel Haughton states he cannot send immediate help to Saragarhi.
* The soldiers decide to fight to the last to prevent the enemy reaching the forts.
* Bhagwan Singh becomes the first injured and Lal Singh was seriously wounded.
* Soldiers Lal Singh and Jiwa Singh reportedly carry the dead body of Bhagwan Singh back to the inner layer of the post.
* The enemy break a portion of the wall of the picket.
* Colonel Haughton signals that he has estimated between 10,000 and 14,000 Pashtuns attacking Saraghari.
* The leaders of the Afghan forces reportedly make promises to the soldiers to entice them to surrender.
* Reportedly two determined attempts are made to rush the open gate, but are unsuccessful.
* Later, Fort Lockhart is breached.
* Thereafter, some of the fiercest hand-to-hand fighting occurs.
* In an act of outstanding bravery, Ishar Singh orders his men to fall back into the inner layer, whilst he remains to fight. However, this is breached and all but one of the defending soldiers are killed, along with many of the Pashtuns.
* Gurmukh Singh, who communicated the battle with Col. Haughton, was the last Sikh defender. He is stated to have killed 20 Afghans, the Pashtuns having to set fire to the post to kill him. As he was dying he was said to have yelled repeatedly the regimental battle-cry "Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal (He who cries God is Truth, is ever victorious).

Having destroyed Saragarhi, the Afghans turned their attention to Fort Gulistan, but they had been delayed too long, and reinforcements arrived there in the night of 13-14 September, before the fort could be conquered.[1] The Afghans later stated that they had lost about 180 killed[6] and many more wounded[4] during the engagement against the 21 Sikh soldiers, but some 600 bodies[7] are said to have been seen around the ruined post when the relief party arrived. The total casualties in the entire campaign, including the Battle of Saragarhi, numbered at around 4,800.

Battle of Saragarhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

his Shows The Story Of The Battle Of Saragarhi. And How 21 Singhs Killed 4800 Afghans.

stzlv97cwY4[/media] - Battle Of Saragarhi

 

[Vinod2070]

Legacy

Haripur city, tehsil and district, in Hazara, North-West Frontier Province, Pakistan, is named after him.[1] If Nalwa had lived, many feel that the British would never have been able to hold or enter the Punjab. He beat the Afghans at Attock Fort and held Afghanistan, something which the British failed to do. As Sir Lepel Griffen states:
“ "Hari Singh Nalwa, the man with the terror of whose name Afghan mothers used to quiet their fretful children..." ”

There is a famous saying about Hari Singh in Afghanistan that "Afghani mothers use to make their children sleep,horrifying them by taking Hari Singh Nalwa's name,saying "Nalwa ranglay"[meaning, Nalwa will come].

Nalwa was the consummate example of the Sikh saint-soldier, and India owes much to his strategic genius.

Hari Singh Nalwa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So even if it is not mentioned in the video, there were some from India who conquered the Pathans and did so convincingly.

 

[Vinod2070]

And the video completely fails to mention that the Americans provided all the weapons and the training.

Wonder why!

Why did the same ferocious fighters fold up without a fight in 2001? In fact the "Mujahideen " warlords were bought by the Americans for a few pieces of silver, same as it was done by Taliban earlier.

Afghanistan is practically under foreign rule since 1979.

Almost the lowest in the world on any social indicators!

 

[shehbazi2001]

It seems bizarre and unbelievable that 10,000 Pathan attacked a small post.
Books are full of the details of pathan warfare in colonial times. They were ambush attackers.

Their skills were honed for ambush using daggers and fast attacks using muskets/rifles. They did a kind of guerrilla warfare and only on some occasions would they come in large formations. Such large formations were seen in Kashmir war against the army of Raja and then against Indian Army.

Why dont you mention the details of Hari Singh's army, who was utterly defeated by Pathans in Kashmir.

Pathans used to operate in small groups. Its highly unlikely that for a small outpost, a lashkar of ten thousand men would come.

If you want to easily understand the tribal warfare in the colonial period, I can suggest you a book called "Shamsheer say Zanjeer Tak".

 

[Vinod2070]

It seems bizarre and unbelievable that 10,000 Pathan attacked a small post.
Books are full of the details of pathan warfare in colonial times. They were ambush attackers.

Their skills were honed for ambush using daggers and fast attacks using muskets/rifles. They did a kind of guerrilla warfare and only on some occasions would they come in large formations. Such large formations were seen in Kashmir war against the army of Raja and then against Indian Army.

Why dont you mention the details of Hari Singh's army, who was utterly defeated by Pathans in Kashmir.

Pathans used to operate in small groups. Its highly unlikely that for a small outpost, a lashkar of ten thousand men would come.

If you want to easily understand the tribal warfare in the colonial period, I can suggest you a book called "Shamsheer say Zanjeer Tak".

This story is very well documented. As well as any you will find.

There is no doubt about it's authenticity.

The Pathans did defeat the small Raja's army but ran back as fast as they could once the Indian army came into the picture.

Also there were numerous incidents of looting and rape during the Qabaili raid on Kashmir. The Mujaffarabad markets were looted, the attack on Srinagar was delayed by crucial hours because they were busy looting a Christian chappel and raping nuns on the way, giving crucial time to Indian army to secure the airport and then turn the tables on the raiders.

In fact their behavior turned the Kashmiris against Pakistan.

Thanks for suggesting the book. I will try to get a copy of it.

Is there a PDF version available anywhere?

 

[roadrunner]

Not sure why the battle of SARAGARHI is not mentioned!



Battle of Saragarhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

his Shows The Story Of The Battle Of Saragarhi. And How 21 Singhs Killed 4800 Afghans.

stzlv97cwY4[/media] - Battle Of Saragarhi

Must you try and spoil every thread commemorating a group of people you don't like or can't think further than terrorist (yes, Indians in my experience are worse than westerners at stereotyping this way). Since you bring up Saraghari, let me explain a few things.


1) The Sikhs HAD to fight to the death. They locked (baraacaded) themselves in Fort Saraghari, because they were too timid to face the Afghans (I don't blame them).

2) The Sikhs fired using superior weapons from RAISED ground and from fortified turrets at advancing Afghans in open space. It does not need much of an imagination to see that 1 Sikh firing from a turret has a weaponry and shielding advantage over the advancing Afghans. If you want to see how easy it is to stop an advance if you have a raised ground advantage, then watch this footage from a Soviet -Afghan war film. Notice how easy it is to shoot at the advancing Afghans from the safety of a wall (imagine a fort!).

[youtube]

3) The Sikhs were working for the British - a colonial regime that you obviously worship..do not worry, another colonial empire will take over you soon..there's a reason why India has constantly been occupied over the centuries and the Afghans have not.

4) Your facts about Sikhs ruling Afghans are incorrect. Durrani Afghans regularly ruled over Sikhs until the time of Banda Singh Bahadur.

5) The Sikhs were supplied with the latest rifles, the Afghans were using old equipment (many were armed with swords versus the Sikh rifles).

The advantage lay heavily in the Sikhs favour, even if the numbers did not. Also your figures on the numbers killed are totally incorrect.