Pakistan - The Pathans

[Contrarian]

1 Pakistani soldier is equal to 7 Indian soldiers. I stand by this statement.

I think your mistaken there roadrunner, wasnt it 1 Pakistani soldier equal to 10 Indian soldiers! And that too is a very conservative estimate.

 

[Flintlock]

1 Pakistani soldier is equal to 7 Indian soldiers. I stand by this statement. I think I have proved it, if you can disprove it, do so.

Well, thank goodness this isn't the 18th century.

 

[shehbazi2001]

For those who want just to have a visual glimpse of nature of operations in NWFP in colonial times, I can suggest a movie " LIVES OF A BENGAL LANCER". This movie was made in 1935.

Everything that is shown is not correct historically but still it shows how serious this was for the british. Only the experienced officers were expected to come to the Frontier.

This movie shows very well how the pathans dealt with british informers.

 

[roadrunner]

This factor applied to the Kargil conflict as well. I doubt I have seen you or any other Pakistani use it in that context.

The brave Indian soldiers bravely marched to the peak while the militants on the peaks could easily take aim at their eyes.

Kargil was different. The invading force (Indians) had Howitzers and an airforce at its disposal - the hilltop insurgents did not have access to an airforce to counter, and therefore were cleared with relative ease.

 

[roadrunner]

Man just read your own posts after removing the blinkers. You will know what stereotyping means. I doubt I have seen another person who "proves" his points by posting pictures of slums!

Every person who doesn't confirm to your theory of how he should look becomes "Indian looking". You claim that the "Indian Punjabi" prime ministers should not be counted as Punjabi against the East Pakistanis. Every Indian who doesn't conform to your racist ideas becomes non-Indian looking!

Surprising, you never called Jinnah and Musharraf as Indians though!

If this is not steriotyping, I don't know what is.

Oh please, spare me the self pitying diatribe. The issue here is, what do the majority of Indians look like. You claim they all look like John Abraham or Bollywood stars. I claim Indians look nothing like them, or him, in general. This is not racist, but let's allow other people to make their minds up if this is racist or not, or that you are just out looking for some pity?

Did your favorite British make a mistake here by putting it in one of the greatest battles in the world and a supreme example of bravery in the face of adversity?

I haven't read this battle being called one of the greatest battles. If it has been, it's utter nonsense. The Sikhs had no choice to fight. They were going to die anyway if they surrendered to the Pashtuns (in a much worse way than a bullet to the head), so they needed to hold off till reinforcements were sent as they were surrounded. If they did not fight, it would have been worse for them.

I am talking about Soviets and the Americans and even the Pakistanis.

Of course they will go one day. After cleaning the place of it's "Mujahideen". What is there in Afghanistan for them to want to stay?

The Soviets have already left. The Americans I'd say are midway through leaving. I can't see them staying another decade. The war is getting out of control now anyway.

 

[roadrunner]

AM, The number of dead Afghans is secondary here. The major issue was the exemplary bravery by a bunch of 21 soldiers against a vastly superior force.

Pathans no doubt make good soldiers. But there are others as well who are great fighters and have stood their ground against Pathans in the past.

This post was an attempt to bring a sense of balance and a counter point to the debate which was going like: Pathans are the best fighters in the world and there is no match to them.

The reasons they stood their ground have been given - they had no choice

The reasons they had a better kill ratio have been given - better weapons, shooting from the high ground, better weapons, fortified defences, lack of long range weapons in the opposition.

There was nothing spectacular about the Sikh defence of the fort. Definitely it was not equal to The Battle of Thermopylae.

I have no doubt about that.

Afghans are more hardy than the Iraqis, but they are only good at insurgency. They seem to be incapable to build a modern nation.

Look at what they did after the Soviets were pushed back. They started fighting among themselves indulging in looting, warlordism sacking of cities, destruction of the infrastructure etc., hardly fitting the definition of "Mujahideen"!

And again the Taliban "won" Afghanistan by paying off the warlords, same way as the USA "won" in 2001. Soviet Union also captured Kabul quite easily, it only got struck in the USA weaved quagmire later on.

So while they are good at insurgency, they seem incapable of an organized resistance and at nation building.

Organized resistance or disorganized, the resistance has been effective against countless superpowers in history.

As for nation building. You should know Gandhara was situated in modern Pashtun Afghanistan and various parts of Pakistan. One can hardly call them poor at nation building having created, or been part of, such a kingdom.

 

[EagleEyes]

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

^Thats better than the 300 movie.

 

[Muradk]

Well according to Historians these are the names
A role call of the 21 soldiers was then made:

165 Havildar Ishar Singh

332 Naik Lal Singh 834
Sepoy Narayan Singh
546 Lance Naik Chanda
814 Sepoy Gurmukh Singh
1321 Sepoy Sundar Singh
871 Sepoy Jivan Singh
287 Sepoy Ram Singh
1733 Sepoy Gurmukh Singh
492 Sepoy Uttar Singh
163 Sepoy Ram Singh
182 Sepoy Sahib Singh
1257 Sepoy Bhagwan Singh
359 Sepoy Hira Singh
1265 Sepoy Bhagwan Singh
687 Sepoy Daya Singh
1556 Sepoy Buta Singh
760 Sepoy Jivan Singh
1651 Sepoy Jivan Singh
791 Sepoy Bhola Singh
1221 Sepoy Nand Singh


The Battle of Saragarhi was fought in 1897 in the now NWFP(North West frontier province) in Pakistan.It is an epitome of Valour, Courage, Bravery and Sacrifice. Havildar Issar Singh with 21 Other Ranks made the supreme sacrifice repulsing 10,000 of the enemy. This sacrifice was recognized by the British Parliament, when it rose to pay its respects to these brave young soldiers. All 22 were awarded the Indian Order of Merit (IOM), the then highest decoration for an Indian soldier. This 'Kohinoor' of the Sikh Regiment is one of the ten most famous battles of the world. Even to this date, this battle forms part of the school curriculum in France.more

Saragarhi, a communications post was beseiged by over 10,000 tribesmen with only 21 soldiers, all Sikhs, of the 36th Sikh Regiment. The battle of Saragarhi Hill fought on 12 September 1897 has been cited by UNESCO as one of the five most significant events of its kind in World history. When news of the battle reached London both Houses of Parliament gave a rare standing ovation in honour of the 21 Sikhs who died holding the post.

 

[Vinod2070]

Well according to Historians these are the names
A role call of the 21 soldiers was then made:

165 Havildar Ishar Singh

332 Naik Lal Singh 834
Sepoy Narayan Singh
546 Lance Naik Chanda
814 Sepoy Gurmukh Singh
1321 Sepoy Sundar Singh
871 Sepoy Jivan Singh
287 Sepoy Ram Singh
1733 Sepoy Gurmukh Singh
492 Sepoy Uttar Singh
163 Sepoy Ram Singh
182 Sepoy Sahib Singh
1257 Sepoy Bhagwan Singh
359 Sepoy Hira Singh
1265 Sepoy Bhagwan Singh
687 Sepoy Daya Singh
1556 Sepoy Buta Singh
760 Sepoy Jivan Singh
1651 Sepoy Jivan Singh
791 Sepoy Bhola Singh
1221 Sepoy Nand Singh


The Battle of Saragarhi was fought in 1897 in the now NWFP(North West frontier province) in Pakistan.It is an epitome of Valour, Courage, Bravery and Sacrifice. Havildar Issar Singh with 21 Other Ranks made the supreme sacrifice repulsing 10,000 of the enemy. This sacrifice was recognized by the British Parliament, when it rose to pay its respects to these brave young soldiers. All 22 were awarded the Indian Order of Merit (IOM), the then highest decoration for an Indian soldier. This 'Kohinoor' of the Sikh Regiment is one of the ten most famous battles of the world. Even to this date, this battle forms part of the school curriculum in France.more

Saragarhi, a communications post was beseiged by over 10,000 tribesmen with only 21 soldiers, all Sikhs, of the 36th Sikh Regiment. The battle of Saragarhi Hill fought on 12 September 1897 has been cited by UNESCO as one of the five most significant events of its kind in World history. When news of the battle reached London both Houses of Parliament gave a rare standing ovation in honour of the 21 Sikhs who died holding the post.

Thx. Muradk for sharing this.

RR any comments on Muradk' s post.

Let's learn to accept the truth even if it is inconvenient.

 

[Vinod2070]

Kargil was different. The invading force (Indians) had Howitzers and an airforce at its disposal - the hilltop insurgents did not have access to an airforce to counter, and therefore were cleared with relative ease.

Of course India employed every means at it's disposal as we must do.

But as many people have pointed out, the air force was largely ineffective in the terrain and given the self-imposed restrictions of not crossing the LOC.

Finally It fell to the old fashioned infantry to win the peaks back. With tough hand to hand combats against ferocious opponents.

 

[Muradk]

Thx. Mudrak for sharing this.

RR any comments on Mudrak' s post.

Let's learn to accept the truth even if it is inconvenient.

You spelled my name wrong but no problem, I have seen the whole thing in UK the Photos are incredible.
the other 4 battles one of them is ZULU if you haven't seen it see it same situation, The only battle in the history in which who ever was left alive out of 200 I think it was 24 of them they all got Victoria Cross. Highest number of Victoria cross awarded in a single Battle.

 

[Vinod2070]

Oh please, spare me the self pitying diatribe. The issue here is, what do the majority of Indians look like. You claim they all look like John Abraham or Bollywood stars. I claim Indians look nothing like them, or him, in general. This is not racist, but let's allow other people to make their minds up if this is racist or not, or that you are just out looking for some pity?

Man, you get it all mixed up. It is not self pity at all!

It is pitying you for your thought process which is utterly diabolical. I have seen many Pakistani members too getting nauseated and revolted by your comments.

I am just amazed and disgusted by your distasteful obsession with looks. Would someday try to get a psycho-anaytical portrait of where the obsession came from.

I just hope this kind of thinking is not the norm there, for Pakistan's own sake!

I haven't read this battle being called one of the greatest battles. If it has been, it's utter nonsense. The Sikhs had no choice to fight. They were going to die anyway if they surrendered to the Pashtuns (in a much worse way than a bullet to the head), so they needed to hold off till reinforcements were sent as they were surrounded. If they did not fight, it would have been worse for them.

Read Muradk's post. He has said it better than I could.

All battles are not fought out of choice. Most are forced on the soldiers. It takes nothing away from the bravery of the soldiers. Again you left me amazed at the kind of argument presented here.

The Soviets have already left. The Americans I'd say are midway through leaving. I can't see them staying another decade. The war is getting out of control now anyway.

I hope that Afghanistan can stabilize and become a country on its way to development. Chances look slim.

The only hope is that the coalition can clean up the Taliban rag-tag and build strong institutions in the country.

Else there is nothing but decades of chaos with the occasional USAF bomb droppings and missile firing in store.

 

[roadrunner]

Thx. Mudrak for sharing this.

RR any comments on Mudrak' s post.

Let's learn to accept the truth even if it is inconvenient.

The Battle of Saraghari does not feature on UNESCO's website. If it were that impressive, I think they'd have mentioned it. Wiki is usually factless. Search the whole site, if you like. If you can give me a good link, I'll believe you. And if it's true, then UNESCO is pretty clueless, but you will not be able to find a reputable link.

UNESCO.ORG | Search Results

All battles are not fought out of choice. Most are forced on the soldiers. It takes nothing away from the bravery of the soldiers. Again you left me amazed at the kind of argument presented here.

Indeed. And every single argument presented to you here, you've not been able to prove or disprove, except to quote wiki It's really very simple. You tell me what else the Sikhs could have done, except fight - they were going to die anyway. You tell me what is so special about holeing oneself up in heavy fortifications, using the best weaponry, and shooting from a hilltop at a lot of men with swords. Nothing much is the answer. The figure of 4,800 dead is ridiculous also. Perhaps 200 might have been killed from the battle.

You will not be able to find a credible reference to the myth about UNESCO quoting the Battle of Saragarhi as one of the 8 brave battles in history or UNESCO calling it as equal to Thermopyle or whatever. - because it was not an act of bravery but desperation (that's not to say that Sikhs can't be brave soldiers of course, but this isn't an example of bravery, and generally I don't consider Sikhs to be so brave considering they sided with colonialist Empires).

 

[Vinod2070]

You spelled my name wrong but no problem, I have seen the whole thing in UK the Photos are incredible.
the other 4 battles one of them is ZULU if you haven't seen it see it same situation, The only battle in the history in which who ever was left alive out of 200 I think it was 24 of them they all got Victoria Cross. Highest number of Victoria cross awarded in a single Battle.

Sorry for that. I think I mixed up your name with a Pakistani columnist whom I admire.

I have gone back and corrected my posts.

Do you have any links to share on the other 4 battles. Thx. in advance.

 

[Vinod2070]

The Battle of Saraghari does not feature on UNESCO's website. If it were that impressive, I think they'd have mentioned it. Wiki is usually factless. Search the whole site, if you like. If you can give me a good link, I'll believe you. And if it's true, then UNESCO is pretty clueless, but I doubt you will not be able to find a reputable link.

UNESCO.ORG | Search Results

Muradk has mentioned a great source. I guess it is available in some London museums too. Search for it in google and you find 3600 links.

Saragarhi Battle - Google Search

Saragarhi Battle + Unesco - Google Search

It is up to you to believe it or not. I have presented my facts. As I said earlier, you can only take the horse to the water and no further.

Indeed. And every single argument presented to you here, you've not been able to prove or disprove, except to quote wiki It's really very simple. You tell me what else the Sikhs could have done, except fight - they were going to die anyway. You tell me what is so special about holeing oneself up in heavy fortifications, using the best weaponry, and shooting from a hilltop at a lot of men with swords. Nothing much is the answer. The figure of 4,800 dead is ridiculous also. Perhaps 200 might have been killed from the battle.

You will not be able to find a credible reference to the myth about UNESCO quoting the Battle of Saragarhi as one of the 8 brave battles in history equal to Thermopyle or whatever.

I don't believe the number of dead Afghans is a good measure of the bravery of those soldiers same as the number of dead Persians would not be for the battle of Thermopylae. It does not matter at all. What matters is the sheer spirit of these guys in fighting the odds.

The Greeks too had superior ground in that battle. I does not take away from their bravery. The odds were still overwhelmingly against them. And they were facing certain death.