Sikh, Pathan and Gurkha soldiers in the eyes of Winston S. Churchill

[ghoul]

Its depends. Forexample pak army consist of the same "mercenary" races of british. Same Potohar, peshawer and kohat, as were in british times.
@ghoul your comments?

Dude your hatred for Pakistan army and Pakistan is getting obvious day by day. But what else can you expect from a dari speaking Pakistani pakhtun haha. Why do you guys hide your identity btw? There was another dari speaking pashtun on pdf before who claimed to be a pakistani.

And calling us a mercenary race is rich considering your average afghan is the definition of a mercenary. Afghans joined Mahmud, Ghauri, Mamluks, Nadir Shah, Babur and even Prithviraj Chauhan as mercenaries. Your ethnic group made the pindari gangs, first maharajah of bhopal was a mercenary pahtun soldier from Tirah valley, the central Indian Pakhtun/Afghan states supported Marhattas in Panipat just to save their own estates, and you have the nerve to call us mercenaries?

If we were mercenaries, we'd have joined Sikhs and Dogras too, but we didn't. We also didn't join Sher Shah against mughals so figure out. And we joined british, because they returned our lands to us. They were also respectful to us in general and followed a policy of "emotional government".

PS: Gakhar cavalry was considered the best in whole sub-continent, and in general consensus, Punjabi musalman was considered the second best after the sikh.

 

[dil_dil]

There is only mentions of "Afridis" who were supposed to have been dardic language speakers before they adopted pashto language of Abdalis. I don't see any mention of Lohani baniya pashtuns anywhere .

I think these nomenclatures of Pathan and Sikh are misleading here. One must be specific about particular tribes mentioned in the text. Because Churchil was essentially praising only Afridi pashtuns as soldiers. And we all know vast majority of Sikh soldiers were sikh Jatts only, not every tom and dick among sikhs.

True, Afridis are indigenous **** tribe for thousands of years long before they were pathans/pashtuns mentioned by ancient Panini. They are dardic/indo-aryan origin. Sikh was also just a umbrella term for sikh jatts.

 

[RazPaK]

Dude your hatred for Pakistan army and Pakistan is getting obvious day by day. But what else can you expect from a dari speaking Pakistani pakhtun haha. Why do you guys hide your identity btw? There was another dari speaking pashtun on pdf before who claimed to be a pakistani.

And calling us a mercenary race is rich considering your average afghan is the definition of a mercenary. Afghans joined Mahmud, Ghauri, Mamluks, Nadir Shah, Babur and even Prithviraj Chauhan as mercenaries. Your ethnic group made the pindari gangs, first maharajah of bhopal was a mercenary pahtun soldier from Tirah valley, the central Indian Pakhtun/Afghan states supported Marhattas in Panipat just to save their own estates, and you have the nerve to call us mercenaries?

If we were mercenaries, we'd have joined Sikhs and Dogras too, but we didn't. We also didn't join Sher Shah against mughals so figure out. And we joined british, because they returned our lands to us. They were also respectful to us in general and followed a policy of "emotional government".

PS: Gakhar cavalry was considered the best in whole sub-continent, and in general consensus, Punjabi musalman was considered the second best after the sikh.

I agree with most of your points, disagree with some of them.

 

[ghoul]

I agree with most of your points, disagree with some of them.

What point do you particularly disagree with and why exactly?

 

[RazPaK]

Why Punjabi Arains are not beghairats like the rest of you kalay engrez, happy to serve under the british:

The Arain were classified as a "non-martial race" by the British, a classification deemed arbitrary and based on prejudices prevalent at the time (see martial race). Actually Arain was a much better martial race as is evident from their history. For example Shah Abdul Qadir Ludhianvi, a great freedom fighter, was able to drive out the British from Ludhiana, during the 1857 War of Independence which the British Colonialist prefer to call mutiny. Interestingly he was one of the few Muslim fighters to have taken up arms against the Colonialists. He took his forces to Panipat and from there to Chandni Chowk in Delhi, but was defeated and martyred fighting. Maulana Sani's theory was that because Shah Abdul Qadir was an Arain the British later put a ban on that tribe from being employed in their Indian army.

Either Tughlaq or Mahmood Ghaznavi sent a horse-mounted army comprising of Awan and Arain from Jalandhar and Anbala under the command of Imam Ali-ul-Haq, an Arain,to capture the rioting town of Sakala near Jammu. Imam captured the town and converted many people to Islam. The town was named Aspalkot which changed to Spalkot and later Sialkot. Imam was martyred in a skirmish and buried in the city. The people who came with him were called Aspal or Spal arain. This sub-tribe also settled in Gujrat and Wazirabad and Arain in baluch city in Daddar in balochistan.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

On topic sikhs did push Pashtuns beyond Khyper pass in wilderness and barren lands and deprived them of fertile land , Thank God for creation of Pakistan they(like every Pakistani) got not only fertile lands of theirs back but fertile land and Valleys of whole Pakistan on top of that strategic sea routes as well, we should all be thankful to Quaid, am I right? @Marwat Khan Lodhi

Thats weird thing to say. Pashtuns didnt get pushed beyond khyber pass, they were there where they were before sikhs arrival. Sikhs were more interested in extracting tributes than ruling, that is what british have mentioned, that there was no presence of sikh rule beyond peshawer city. Sikhs occupied peshawer city in 1834 and were in the mood of conquering entire afghanistan. But hari singh nalwa got defeated and died at the hands of afridis when he attempted to conquer khyber. After his death sikhs lost all territories and were reduced to peshawer city. Inhabitants of peshawer were hindkowans and surrounding pashtun tribes were eager to take on well defended city of peshawer. Sir edward who arrived in bannu in 1839 writes that no sikh army has been sent to kohat, bannu and DI khan to extract tribute since death of hari singh nalwa. As you can see their rule was nominal and short-lived and couldnt conquer yousafzai country. It were british who truely conquered pashtuns, two third of us.

 

[RazPaK]

What point do you particularly disagree with and why exactly?

Gakhar calvary was one of the best, excluding the Jatts of Jhelum. I disagree with your love of the British. They were outsiders.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

.


This is what i am getting from source. In WW1 1.4 million British subjects fought for them, 54% of them were punjabis. In WW2 1.8 million British subjetcs fought for them, punjabis were 1/3 this time around. So in both wars around 600k from Punjab.

By punjabis you also means sikhs?

 

[RazPaK]

Thats weird thing to say. Pashtuns didnt get pushed beyond khyber pass, they were there where they were before sikhs arrival. Sikhs were more interested in extracting tributes than ruling, that is what british have mentioned, that there was no presence of sikh rule beyond peshawer city. Sikhs occupied peshawer city in 1834 and were in the mood of conquering entire afghanistan. But hari singh nalwa got defeated and died at the hands of afridis when he attempted to conquer khyber. After his death sikhs lost all territories and were reduced to peshawer city. Inhabitants of peshawer were hindkowans and surrounding pashtun tribes were eager to take on well defended city of peshawer. Sir edward who arrived in bannu in 1839 writes that no sikh army has been sent to kohat, bannu and DI khan to extract tribute since death of hari singh nalwa. As you can see their rule was nominal and short-lived and couldnt conquer yousafzai country. It were british who truely conquered pashtuns, two third of us.

Oy!!! Mera Shazadaaa!

 

[dil_dil]

By punjabis you also means sikhs?

All of them.

 

[ghoul]

Thats weird thing to say. Pashtuns didnt get pushed beyond khyber pass, they were there where they were before sikhs arrival. Sikhs were more interested in extracting tributes than ruling, that is what british have mentioned, that there was no presence of sikh rule beyond peshawer city. Sikhs occupied peshawer city in 1834 and were in the mood of conquering entire afghanistan. But hari singh nalwa got defeated and died at the hands of afridis when he attempted to conquer khyber. After his death sikhs lost all territories and were reduced to peshawer city. Inhabitants of peshawer were hindkowans and surrounding pashtun tribes were eager to take on well defended city of peshawer. Sir edward who arrived in bannu in 1839 writes that no sikh army has been sent to kohat, bannu and DI khan to extract tribute since death of hari singh nalwa. As you can see their rule was nominal and short-lived and couldnt conquer yousafzai country. It were british who truely conquered pashtuns, two third of us.

D.I.Khan, Mianwali and Lakki Marwat were also under Sikhs. All Hazara and Swabi, Charsadda area was under the Sikhs. The Yousafzais had been attacked on many occasions, but Sikhs didn't enter Swat. The Pakhtuns of Peshawar collaborated with Sikhs. General ventura of Sikhs use to give severe punishments to captured Pakhtun rebels. The taxation for Lakki Marwat, D.I.Khan and Mianwali was handed over to Fateh Khan Tiwana, who killed a number of Pakhtun chieftains in D.I.Khan over a petty argument.

And even local sources claim 180 dead in Sarargarhi haha. But of course, had it been 21 pakhtuns vs 10,000 sikhs, the afghani would have celebrated it. lol. You should be thankful to Pakistan for granting your family relative peace and an internet connection. The Pakistan army that you talk shit about is the reason why most Pakistan is peaceful and people like you ran away from their own country. Why don't you help your countrymen for a change and stop enjoying the peace ensured by Pak army. Pak army zindabaad.

Why Punjabi Arains are not beghairats like the rest of you kalay engrez, happy to serve under the british:

Who was your reply meant for? :S

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Another source

Approximately 200,000 soldiers from Punjab were recruited in the Indian Army till the year 1919. The soldiers from North Punjab were 86,000 in number sharing 43 percent of the Punjab Army. 49 percent were from the Central and Eastern Punjab while only
8 percent were from the South-West Punjab.

Disparities in Province Punjab | Nasir Javaid - Academia.edu

That is an interesting info. In WW2 there were 6000 trans indus pathan soldiers. And total number of pathans including multani, indian and cis-indus pathans, was 12000. Punjabis were 2 lakh in WW2 according to this source. The percentage of pashtuns in army with pakistan has actually improved, they are now around 80 thousands in regular and 70 thousands in paramilitary.

 

[RazPaK]

D.I.Khan, Mianwali and Lakki Marwat were also under Sikhs. All Hazara and Swabi, Charsadda area was under the Sikhs. The Yousafzais had been attacked on many occasions, but Sikhs didn't enter Swat. The Pakhtuns of Peshawar collaborated with Sikhs. General ventura of Sikhs use to give severe punishments to captured Pakhtun rebels. The taxation for Lakki Marwat, D.I.Khan and Mianwali was handed over to Fateh Khan Tiwana, who killed a number of Pakhtun chieftains in D.I.Khan over a petty argument.

And even local sources claim 180 dead in Sarargarhi haha. But of course, had it been 21 pakhtuns vs 10,000 sikhs, the afghani would have celebrated it. lol. You should be thankful to Pakistan for granting your family relative peace and an internet connection. The Pakistan army that you talk shit about is the reason why most Pakistan is peaceful and people like you ran away from their own country. Why don't you help your countrymen for a change and stop enjoying the peace ensured by Pak army. Pak army zindabaad.



Who was your reply meant for? :S

Not you kaka. Lamba saa le la.

 

[ghoul]

Gakhar calvary was one of the best, excluding the Jatts of Jhelum. I disagree with your love of the British. They were outsiders.

Do you have any citations of reading done on the topic or just your own opinion? Do you even know the social standing of Jatts in north Punjab. Jatts never had any military power in Potohar in its history. Of course, no offence meant to jatts.

 

[RazPaK]

Do you have any citations of reading done on the topic or just your own opinion? Do you even know the social standing of Jatts in north Punjab. Jatts never had any military power in Potohar in its history. Of course, no offence meant to jatts.

Jatts were some of the best calvary men against Alexander the greek, my friend.