Ranjit Singh : The Quintessential Indus Man

[RobbieS]

Enough emmo, u already have brainwashed Indians and results are that Mulsims are indiscriminately killed in Kashmir and other riots.

All blames are blames concocted by HIndu and sikhs, rising up against king is unfogiveable sin dealt with a swere punishment. and those who under the guise of Religion commited it were dealt with by Army and than punished.

Now all This happened 3 to 4 hundered years ago, I find it based on false allegations used by present day racists to create hatered among common Indians to set them up for Muslim hating riots.

Asq, I was genuinely and pleasantly surprised by your first post where you tried to convey your pov in a non-confrontational manner.

But it seems like it didn't take you long to link up your version of history with the present situation. You found Peshwas critique of Aurangzeb's Mughal rule so hard to swallow that you proclaimed them all as false Hindu-Sikh propaganda. With the generalizng statements that your ilk make on this forum, I wonder who is fed propaganda.

 

[asq]

Asq, I was genuinely and pleasantly surprised by your first post where you tried to convey your pov in a non-confrontational manner.

But it seems like it didn't take you long to link up your version of history with the present situation. You found Peshwas critique of Aurangzeb's Mughal rule so hard to swallow that you proclaimed them all as false Hindu-Sikh propaganda. With the generalizng statements that your ilk make on this forum, I wonder who is fed propaganda.

U call what ever u want. the hatered that I see spewed by Indians on this forum by the posts they write are mostly based on inuendos and exegerations, further to mention the attrocites during partition were just a few indications of how Indian think about Muslims, to me it is all a hatered for Muslims and Islam.

Read a referance and the link to go with for your enlightenment.

Compare it with the development that took place in India after the partition (1947). But these attacks on Muslim life and property in Spain did not abate but continued for about 50 years with lesser intensity in a sporadic manner, just as it is happening in India today. In the earlier years, the Indian Muslims resisted and fought back. There were mini-battles in the streets, but gradually there were one-sided attacks and every time Muslims were the losers. Of late, the Hindu police itself is let lose to kill the Muslims in India.

How to Exterminate Muslims in India? by Dalit Voice

 

[Iqbal_Brar]

U call what ever u want. the hatered that I see spewed by Indians on this forum by the posts they write are mostly based on inuendos and exegerations, further to mention the attrocites during partition were just a few indications of how Indian think about Muslims, to me it is all a hatered for Muslims and Islam.

Read a referance and the link to go with for your enlightenment.

Compare it with the development that took place in India after the partition (1947). But these attacks on Muslim life and property in Spain did not abate but continued for about 50 years with lesser intensity in a sporadic manner, just as it is happening in India today. In the earlier years, the Indian Muslims resisted and fought back. There were mini-battles in the streets, but gradually there were one-sided attacks and every time Muslims were the losers. Of late, the Hindu police itself is let lose to kill the Muslims in India.

How to Exterminate Muslims in India? by Dalit Voice

HUH?? pusshing your own agenda much??

so let me get this straight... you have tried to portray that all Mughals = Muslims... when you are pointed out by other Indians that we don't see all Mughals = Muslims.. and we see some good mughals and some bad mughals.. you don't like that because that type of thinking goes against your agenda... you WANT to paint ALL Mughals as Muslim representatives.. no matter how big of corrupt drunkards and womanizers they were... you 100% condone with RSS BS because it helps your agenda... you clearly ignore the "pages after pages" (as one of your friends pointed out here) of anti-RSS debate carried out by other Indians... because ofcourse that would go against your pre-conceived notions... you are more than happy to see RSS chaps like biplob spew their safron BS because it helps your agenda.. and that is why even after so many Indians arguing against that thinking you're jumping up and down to paint those guys as the true "Indians".. and completely ignore alllll the otherrss who were arguing withh themm... you're agenda is EXACT same as RSS and that is to dividee people along religious lines... right onn...

 

[jinxeD_girl]

Iqbal,

What is your opinion about this very famous South Indian actress Shakeela? Do You think she is pretty?

http://img694.imageshack.us/i/shakeela1.jpg/

http://img214.imageshack.us/i/shakeela2.jpg/

 

[biplob]

Iqbal,

What is your opinion about this very famous South Indian actress Shakeela? Do You think she is pretty?

http://img694.imageshack.us/i/shakeela1.jpg/

http://img214.imageshack.us/i/shakeela2.jpg/

Who told u Shakeela is very famous ??
If u think the attention she gets for roles in adult films as fame ,yaa she famous ...

PS :Dont drag off topics stuff on this thread.

 

[jinxeD_girl]

Who told u Shakeela is very famous ??
If u think the attention she gets for roles in adult films as fame ,yaa she famous ...

really? I was googling south indian actresses and Shakeela showed up!! wow! People find her attractive in India? because this time my eyes certainly are not beholding this beauty!!

 

[biplob]

Yes you're narrow minded.. the one reason you're getting smacked around by every Sikh on this forum.. how about you care about your own religion and cut out your BS theories on our religion...

I dont care how u see of ur religion,its origin and rituals.

Its only when IBRIS stated how Sikhs went out of they way to save Hindus(of punjab and kashmir only)...i was forced to make some clarification regarding contribution of Hindus of Punjab in building and sustaining the Hals forces before he try portray Sikh as Saviour's of us Hindus.

Irrespective of selfish and motived BS, the Hindus families who donated their sons to join Sikhism and become sadars generation after generations which she Sikhism any differents than Hinduism.Thank u.

pussyfooting? loll errmm.. noo.. maybe heres the difference.. our ancestors fought hard and established a powerful kingdom right in the yard of the Mughals and fought to secure our dignity.. so that in the end it was Sikh armies who were helping decide who sits on the Mughal throne (Bahadur Shah).. so no in the end we came out of the fight with our heads held high..

U dont understand that its moghul atrocities that helped Sikh to become martial and raise the khalsa army which in the made way for a sikh ruling state in Punjab.Same is true for the Martha's .U are asking everyone forget this inconvenient past of mogul atrocities as u sparely try here court Muslim just annoy Hindus who are majority India in Ur bid to show how Sikhs are martian with alien distinct identity bearing no close relations with Hindus which is utter falsehood .

Talking up Bahadur Shah which i saw u have been on quite few occasions,I'll take this occasions to teach u some real history.

While most of india was busying the British east India company in Sepoy Revolution of 1857 and both Hindu and Muslims warlords had joined hands to fight East Indian company together under nominal leadership of the last Mogul emperor Behead Shah ,its the same Sikhs armies who acted as paid mercenaries of the East India company fought against the Indian Sepoy's rebel and help the Britisher push back and topple Blahed in Delhi Shah squash brutally the first Indian freedom struggle.

Yeah.. you bracketed "UN flag" in like every post of yours... yeah.. thats not winning you any brownie points... its the substance in your posts which does the talking... you think the "UN flag" is enough to brand me a Khalistani...

I love ur UN flag,keep it flying.
Thats help us single out and differentate between a loyal Indian Sikh and Iqbal_brar

 

[biplob]

really? I was googling south indian actresses and Shakeela showed up!! wow! People find her attractive in India? because this time my eyes certainly are not beholding this beauty!!

Yaa, if after all south Indian actress u googled u think some find Shakeela as attractive then it says volume about ur taste and googling standards.

U are in looking in wrong places madam...dont u think...??

 

[Iqbal_Brar]

Iqbal,

What is your opinion about this very famous South Indian actress Shakeela? Do You think she is pretty?

http://img694.imageshack.us/i/shakeela1.jpg/

http://img214.imageshack.us/i/shakeela2.jpg/

I can't comment on biplob's diva... he'll get mad again..

 

[niaz]

As a student of history, especially of the subcontinent, I have mixed feeling about Ranjit Singh. One must remember that no ruler can be all good or all bad. One must also realize that all successful rulers have to be ruthless else they wouldn’t succeed.

Starting with the good points of Ranjit Singh. First and foremost he was a fearless soldier; don’t think Punjab has produced another general of his caliber since the brave Porus of two thousand years ago. He organized the army on modern lines and even the English respected his military prowess. Actually the only resistance that East India Company army ever encountered was from Hyder Ali/Tipu Sultan, Marhattas and the Sikhs. Their victories against Bengal Nawabs (Plessey) and against combined armies of Mughal Emperors/ Nawab of Awadh (Baksar) were a peace of cake in comparison.

Ranjit Singh was also an able administrator and he truly brought peace to Punjab after years of turmoil. He also treated Hindus and Sikhs equally thus showed some tolerance in an intolerant age. He was also a clever politician; his diplomatic maneuvers with the Afghan Kings Shah Zaman and Shah Shuja indicate that he understood “Realpolitik’ very well.

Now his bad points. Despite the fact that he treated some Muslims well and Fakir Azizuddin was his long serving foreign minister; most of his campaigns were against the Muslims rulers.

Punjab had been a part of the Durrani Empire since Ahmad Shah’s time some 50 years earlier. Descendents of Ahmad Shah were not of the same caliber resulting in many semi independent rulers in Punjab.

In the early 1800’ Ranjit Singh fought Nizamuddin of Kasur; ousted Jaffer Khan from Khushab; by 1810 he had also captured Attock fort from the Afghans. In 1817 he sacked Multan and ousted Nawab Muzzaffar Khan. In 1818 he captured Peshawar and by 1823 nearly all of the Durrani territories this side of Khyber were his control, he had also captured Durrani Capital Kabul. His armies under Hari Singh Nalwa destroyed the Islamic Emirate of Syed Ahmed Braelvi at Balakot in 1831.

There was widespread looting and pillaging in the aftermath of nearly all the Sikh battles with Muslim armies; the victims were therefore mostly Muslims. Armies of the Bhangi Misl, especially Lahina Sing were particularly brutal to Muslims in his Multan campaigns. I would however admit that Ranjit Singh era for Lahori Muslims was far better than 30 years of Sikha Shahi under the Bhangis.

One can understand why majority of the Punjabi Muslims don’t have a high opinion of Ranjit Singh or the Sikh rule.

 

[RobbieS]

@Niaz - Your sole criteria for raising bad points seems to be the fact that MRS fought against the Muslim rulers. That was a fact and would be so because most of the rulers of Punjab and surrounding areas apart from the Misl Sardars were Muslims. You have also quoted MRS campaigns against Afghan rulers amongst the bad points of his rule. You seem to discount the fact that though he was a Sikh he was a native Punjabi fighting against Afghans descendants who were foreigners.

Pillaging and looting, though a part and parcel of the wars of those times is condemnable. I wont be proud of that.

 

[biplob]

I can't comment on biplob's diva... he'll get mad again..

U made her my diva...

I knew u have penchant for making cheap propaganda.

 

[Iqbal_Brar]

I dont care how u see of ur religion,its origin and rituals.

yehh.. we figured that out long ago.. lolll...

Irrespective of selfish and motived BS, the Hindus families who donated their sons to join Sikhism and become sadars generation after generations which she Sikhism any differents than Hinduism.Thank u.

"donated their sons".. lolll... you really buy into that a whole lot ehh.... if they wanted to "donate".. they could easily just form their own Hindu armies and fight alongside Sikhs.. but noooo... they became Sikhs... they were NOT Hindus who fought alongside Sikhs... they converted.. hence they were SIKHS who fought in Sikh Khalsa army.. period..

U dont understand that its moghul atrocities that helped Sikh to become martial and raise the khalsa army which in the made way for a sikh ruling state in Punjab.Same is true for the Martha's .U are asking everyone forget this inconvenient past of mogul atrocities as u sparely try here court Muslim just annoy Hindus who are majority India in Ur bid to show how Sikhs are martian with alien distinct identity bearing no close relations with Hindus which is utter falsehood .

lolll.. you've been brainwashed by RSS to believe that all of India belongs to Hindus.... it doesn't.. funny how you reek of ure "Hindutva India" ideology and blame others for being "Khalistanis"... hell am sure if Sikhs were to choose between a Sikh state or Hindu state.. they will choose Sikh state.... we know ure motive.. you're segregating between hundreds of millions of other Indians like Christians and Muslims.... sorry buddy... get a reality check.. Sikhs of Punjab hate the RSS... as for Hindus.. they are our brothers as much as Christians and Muslims... infact Sikhs live in peace with all religions in Punjab.. hindus.. christians.. muslims... but it is only your RSS monkeys which cause problems.. like recently how they started Christian riots in Punjab by putting up disgraceful pictures of Jesus.. RSS are monkeys who need to be put on a leash..

Talking up Bahadur Shah which i saw u have been on quite few occasions,I'll take this occasions to teach u some real history.

While most of india was busying the British east India company in Sepoy Revolution of 1857 and both Hindu and Muslims warlords had joined hands to fight East Indian company together under nominal leadership of the last Mogul emperor Behead Shah ,its the same Sikhs armies who acted as paid mercenaries of the East India company fought against the Indian Sepoy's rebel and help the Britisher push back and topple Blahed in Delhi Shah squash brutally the first Indian freedom struggle.

buddyyy...... i was talking about Bahadur Shah I.... Aurangzeb's son... not the last Mughal king... and secondly.. yes we helped British to crush that uprising... it was revenge because Maratha and Bengali people helped British to overthrow Sikh kingdom....

I love ur UN flag,keep it flying.
Thats help us single out and differentate between a loyal Indian Sikh and Iqbal_brar

who is this "us" you talk of?? lolll...

 

[Iqbal_Brar]

As a student of history, especially of the subcontinent, I have mixed feeling about Ranjit Singh. One must remember that no ruler can be all good or all bad. One must also realize that all successful rulers have to be ruthless else they wouldn’t succeed.

Starting with the good points of Ranjit Singh. First and foremost he was a fearless soldier; don’t think Punjab has produced another general of his caliber since the brave Porus of two thousand years ago. He organized the army on modern lines and even the English respected his military prowess. Actually the only resistance that East India Company army ever encountered was from Hyder Ali/Tipu Sultan, Marhattas and the Sikhs. Their victories against Bengal Nawabs (Plessey) and against combined armies of Mughal Emperors/ Nawab of Awadh (Baksar) were a peace of cake in comparison.

Ranjit Singh was also an able administrator and he truly brought peace to Punjab after years of turmoil. He also treated Hindus and Sikhs equally thus showed some tolerance in an intolerant age. He was also a clever politician; his diplomatic maneuvers with the Afghan Kings Shah Zaman and Shah Shuja indicate that he understood “Realpolitik’ very well.

Now his bad points. Despite the fact that he treated some Muslims well and Fakir Azizuddin was his long serving foreign minister; most of his campaigns were against the Muslims rulers.

Punjab had been a part of the Durrani Empire since Ahmad Shah’s time some 50 years earlier. Descendents of Ahmad Shah were not of the same caliber resulting in many semi independent rulers in Punjab.

In the early 1800’ Ranjit Singh fought Nizamuddin of Kasur; ousted Jaffer Khan from Khushab; by 1810 he had also captured Attock fort from the Afghans. In 1817 he sacked Multan and ousted Nawab Muzzaffar Khan. In 1818 he captured Peshawar and by 1823 nearly all of the Durrani territories this side of Khyber were his control, he had also captured Durrani Capital Kabul. His armies under Hari Singh Nalwa destroyed the Islamic Emirate of Syed Ahmed Braelvi at Balakot in 1831.

There was widespread looting and pillaging in the aftermath of nearly all the Sikh battles with Muslim armies; the victims were therefore mostly Muslims. Armies of the Bhangi Misl, especially Lahina Sing were particularly brutal to Muslims in his Multan campaigns. I would however admit that Ranjit Singh era for Lahori Muslims was far better than 30 years of Sikha Shahi under the Bhangis.

One can understand why majority of the Punjabi Muslims don’t have a high opinion of Ranjit Singh or the Sikh rule.

Hmm.. I didn't know that.. good post.. probably the most insightful in this whole thread.. thanks...

 

[biplob]

"donated their sons".. lolll... you really buy into that a whole lot ehh.... if they wanted to "donate".. they could easily just form their own Hindu armies and fight alongside Sikhs.. but noooo... they became Sikhs... they were NOT Hindus who fought alongside Sikhs... they converted.. hence they were SIKHS who fought in Sikh Khalsa army.. period.....

R u knucklehead or something??

Cant u get this in to ur head that when Hindu families were sending their elder son to join Khalsa army as a long tradition as ,they never saw Sikhism as some alien religion ,but an offset their own Hindu religion ???

And why This tradition continued into 20th century,where Hindu families of Punjab ,get their elder son baptized as a Sikh sardar ??

If those Hindus had seen Khalsa army as some alien religious forces nothing to do with hindus why would they their sons to become a sardar himself when u said there was no compulsion to do so.

And if it was only for the lure of principle of sikhism,they why not the whole family adopted Sikh religion and choose to donate their elder sons only??

Why no Muslim Punjabi family did have same tradition when u keep harping hard how Sufi saints popular among Sikh gurus and heavily influenced them??

The fact of the matter is that the Hindu Punjabi families didn't see Sikhism unique or separate from their own religion ,but only an offset of Hinduism with puritanical view void of unnecessary ritualistic compulsion that had sipped Hinduism over the centuries of its past history.

infact Sikhs live in peace with all religions in Punjab.. Hindus.. Christians.. muslims... but it is only your RSS monkeys which cause problems.. like recently how they started Christian riots in Punjab by putting up disgraceful pictures of Jesus.. RSS are monkeys who need to be put on a leash

..

sorry buddy,Its only the khalistais who getting arrested and have beengot killed like stray dogs till now .

Dont u thinks its RSS affiliated Punjab police(majority Sikhs themselves) who is blame for this blatant injustice??