Vanity Fair profiles The eXile: "Gutsy...visceral...serious journalism...abusive, defamatory...poignant...paranoid...and right!"
MSNBC: Mark Ames and Yasha Levine
Broke the Koch Brothers' Takeover of America
www.exiledonline.com
eXile Classic / The War Nerd / August 8, 2012

In the wake of this week’s white supremacist massacre of unarmed Sikh worshippers in Wisconsin, The eXiled proudly reposts a War Nerd classic first published in The eXile in July 2007:

FRESNO, CA — I think I’ve finally found a religion I can convert to. I’m thinking of turning Sikh. And we’ll just slide right by all the puns popping into your little heads, if you don’t mind. The Sikhs are just the coolest warrior tribe around. Take their scripture.

My Bible goes on about beating swords into plowshares — I always hated that bit, because all you’d get was a wrecked sword and a lousy plow. But the Sikh scripture actually says that the sword predates the universe: “After the primal manifestation of the sword, the universe was created.”

See? That’s a god who’s got his priorities in order! No doubt about it, I’m letting my beard grow and practicing wrapping old socks around my head. Gary B. Singh, you can call me from now on.

It all started when I got a letter from a guy named Gill, a Sikh in the UK, whining about how I’d talked up all the other warrior tribes but never had a word to say for the Sikhs. “Give us some love, Gary,” Gill whined.

Well, the War Nerd makes war, not love, but after weeks of looking into this Sikh thing, I gotta give the bearded boys their due. The Sikhs have one of the most amazing military histories on the planet. And they’re still living through their Golden Age right now. One of the great last stands in Sikh history happened less than 25 years ago, when 200 Sikh militants holed up in their version of the Mormon Tabernacle, the “Golden Temple” in Amritsar, India. Anybody with sense knew those 200 Sikhs were going to fight like demons, because that’s what Sikhs have been doing for the past 400 years. Sikh military history is so packed with glorious last stands that George Armstrong Custer would be a smalltime footnote if he’d worn a big turban to go with that long hair and beard of his.

It was 1984, and the Indian Army must have known it was in for a big bloody mess to get the temple back, especially since its upper ranks are filled mostly with Sikh generals, Sikhs being the designated hitters of the Indian war game. But Indira Gandhi was PM, and she was a lady who didn’t like being disobeyed, so she ordered her Sikh Commanding General to overrun the temple.

Mistake. The Sikh CO inside the temple was a dude named Shahbeg Singh, who pretty much single-handedly engineered the collapse of the Pakistani Army in the 1971 Indo-Pak War. It was Shahbeg who organized the Mukhti Bahini, the Bangladeshi guerrillas who made history by being the first Bengali armed force in history not to pee in their dhotis and flee at the sound of gunfire. In fact, this Sikh must’ve given the Bengalis some kind of Sikh blood transfusion because they fought well enough to make the West Pak garrisons surrender en masse even before Indian troops crossed the Bengal border. After that it was the end of history for East Bengal, except for a bunch of whiney George Harrison begging chanteys, and a tidal wave or two.

Well, this same Shahbeg arranged the defense of the Golden Temple so well that at the end of a seven-day battle with the Indian Army’s best units, his 200-odd amateur militants had inflicted 83 KIA on the army and even managed to blast the first tank to enter the compound. They paid a price, naturally – at least 500 Sikh dead and the Temple blasted into gold dust. But Sikhs — well, if there’s one thing you can say about ‘em, it’s that they’re willing to pay any price.

And they make the enemy pay, too. Less than five months after Indira Gandhi ordered the attack on the Temple, she was strolling into her garden to be interviewed by that fat old Brit with the Russian name, Peter Ustinov, when the Sikhs got their revenge. It must have been a pretty scene, the fat man sweating in the Delhi heat, Indira swirling up in her best sari — when BOOM! Two of her bodyguards, who were Sikhs, naturally, opened fire on her with machine guns, turning her into human chutney. She died before the sweat dried on Ustinov’s chins. And then, just to add to Ustinov’s fun, her other non-Sikh bodyguards started blasting at the Sikh shooters, killing one and wounding another.

The Compassionate Guru: Founding Sikh, Nanak Sahib

Shortest — and loudest — interview the old battle-ax ever gave. Last, too.

That was the Sikh revenge for “Operation Bluestar,” the temple raid. By the way, that’s another of these lame ops titles they keep coming up with. Should’ve called it “Operation Blowback,” or “Operation Indira, Are You Sure?”

For the Sikhs, this was just like Chapter Two Million in a long and glorious series of battles, assassinations and massacres. The Sikhs were born in the Punjab, the coolest part of India. Every conqueror in history headed that way as soon as he got his learner’s license at 15. Punjab was the last, and the toughest place Alexander himself ever tried to take. He was so impressed with the army of Pontus, as they called it then, that he said every Punjabi deserved to be called Alexander. Which was high praise, since Alex was never known for modesty.

Before him even those lazy necrophiliac Egyptians had a stab at the Punjab. I couldn’t believe it when I read it, but apparently those Nile-side loungers had the energy to attack the Punjab. Everybody had a turn, though it was the Persians and the Afghans who turned invading the Punjab from a healthy, occasional fun evening into an unhealthy obsession.

And that was before Islam was added to the subcontinental mix. By the time Sikhism started, about 400 years ago, the Mughal emperors, basically a bunch of land pirates who swooped down out of Afghanistan to plunder the plains, had tried to convert India to Islam by using the time-honored method of appealing to the prospect’s common sense: “Convert or we’ll hack you into a million tiny pieces.” The Hindu majority, under the thumbs of hundreds of feudal kings, tried to weasel out of conversion so they could hang on to their own homegrown miseries, like the caste system. The Hindus’ ultimate weapon was simple inertia and birthrate. The Afghans’ sword arms just got tired after a while, hacking in that heat, and they said, “Aw, the Hell with it.” Northern India settled into a lazy routine with the occasional massacre, a lot of bribery, nasty little village snobs hating each other.

A brave Sikh martyr takes a Moghul bath

Then along comes the founder of Sikhism, Nanak, and says, “There is no Muslim, there is no Hindu.” Meaning the Hell with both of you. Sikhs were radicals from the start. All the little traditions people know about them started out as in-your-face rebel yells in the Punjab. Like those beards: only the Mughal were allowed to wear long hair and beards. So the Sikh all let theirs grow longer than John and Yoko’s. That name, “Singh,” every Sikh guy has? It means “Lion” but the real point is that it replaced all the caste names they had before. Like Malcolm making his last name “X.”

The Mughals didn’t like it. They said so pretty clearly. Take the early career of the sixth Sikh guru, an orphan named Gobind Rai. It was the Mughals who made him an orphan, by torturing his dad to death. See, in the old Punjab, death was nothing; death was what you got if the head man was in a good mood.

Most of the time they weren’t in a very good mood, so you got real slow, horrible deaths. At least somebody at the Mughal court was nice enough to FedEx Gobind a package with his dad’s head in it, Seven-style.

Gobind decided right about then to end the whole peacenik tradition of Sikhism. He had a sense of style, so to set the mood he called all the Sikhs together and came onstage with a big huge sword and said, “My sword wants blood. Who wants to supply it? I need a volunteer!” Well, he would’ve bombed as a stage magician because there was a looooooong silence, no hands raised, till an Untouchable convert came up. Gobind took him into a tent and came out alone, bloody as an apprentice butcher. Four more volunteers and the crowd was beginning to grumble. Then Gobind revealed the trick, which you’ve all probably guessed already especially if you remember Sunday school, Isaac and Abraham: the five dudes were alive! Heroes! All in new armor! Ready to kill!

These “Five Beloved” were the core of the Akala, the Immortals, an elite Sikh unit that wore these ridiculous Harry Potter turbans with metal rings on them. The rings, called “quoits,” were supposedly sharp and you can throw them as weapons. But I’m sorry, I’d be willing to stand all day in front of some dude in a wizard’s hat throwing sharpened frisbees at me.

The Sikhs’ real weapon was the flintlock. A grumbly Muslim Afghan wrote that “these dogs [the Sikhs] invented the musket, and nobody knows these weapons better. These bad-tempered people discharge hundreds of bullets on the enemy, on the left and right and back.” Aww, poor little Afghan! Those pesky bad-tempered Sikhs, shooting at you when all you want to do is massacre them for their unbelief and steal their stuff along the way! No-friggin’-fair!

The Sikhs were more than happy to fight hand-to-hand whenever it made sense, and even got praise from the Brits for hacking Brit soldiers to death with their swords even after being spitted on the redcoats’ bayonets. But the Sikhs were also sensible people: Why risk getting cut when you can lure the enemy into an ambush and knock him out of the saddle at long range?

The Sikhs evolved a theory of warfare called “the two-and-a-half strikes.” You got a full point for ambushes and hit-and-run attacks, but only a half point for pitched battles where you lost a lot of your own men. Nathan Bedford Forrest, Francis Marion and Patton himself would have agreed.

By 1810 the Sikhs had driven the Mughals out of the Punjab. They owned the place, literally: They had an independent Sikh kingdom running there, and by all accounts it was the one place in India where something sorta resembling law and order actually prevailed.

The only reason the Sikhs didn’t go on to run all of India and maybe the world is simple: They ran into the Brits. Same reason the Zulu didn’t get to own all of southern Africa. A lot of big, strong tribes were on the movie in Queen Victoria’s time, and the same thing happened to most of them: They met the Brits, and that was all she wrote.

Ranjit Singh, the ruler of the Punjab, was smart enough to sign a treaty with the Brits, keep a strong army to back it up, and avoid the sort of little faked “border incidents” the Raj loved to use to start a war. When he died in 1839, the Punjab fell into the usual bickering, and the Brits pounced.

I keep telling you, the Brits circa 1840 weren’t the cute little Monty Python guys you imagine. They were stone killers, the best since the Romans, totally ruthless, no more conscience than a drain contractor. They saw the Sikhs fighting among themselves and went for it.

Even then, even with Sikh traitors fighting for the Brits, the Sikhs had the best of the first Anglo-Sikh war. The Brits lost more than 2,000 men in the first battle, Ferozeshah, in 1845, and were on the verge of offering unconditional surrender when reinforcements arrived and overwhelmed the Khalsa, the Sikh army. The second war, in 1849, was easier, because the Brits, who knew more about occupation than our lame Bremer clones ever will, used the three years in between to bribe, assassinate and divide the Sikh elite. Even so, the Sikh cavalry, fighting basically without any leaders, slaughtered the British cavalry at the battle of Chillianwalla, smacking down the redcoats’ little ceremonial swords with their big scimitars. I’ve read Brit officers’ accounts of that battle, and they say something you get in all accounts of the Sikh: how big and strong the bastards are. The Brits said they felt like children beside the Sikh horsemen, and there’s really funny picture of a white officer surrounded by Sikh soldiers, looking like a pasty little midget with his bodyguards.

And you know the best thing about the Sikhs? They don’t waste time holding grudges. The Brits won; they accepted it, worked with it, and in a few years they were the core of the Raj’s army. That came in handy during the Great Mutiny; the Sikhs stayed loyal and that was what saved the Raj. In fact, the Sikhs stayed so loyal that the battle of Saraghari, one of their greatest-ever last stands, was fought in the service of the British.

In 1897, 21 Sikh soldiers in British service were occupying two tiny forts on the Afghan frontier. The Pushtun were getting bored, the way they do every few months, and decided to stop taking British gold and attack the Raj instead. So 15 or 20,000 Afghans whooped down to the frontier. And those 21 Sikhs were standing in their way.

Proudest of the Proud: Officers in the Punjab Cavalry

The Sikh garrison knew they were doomed, and if anything it kind of relaxed them. They went on to cover themselves with glory, killing hundreds of Afghans before they were overrun. The unit’s communications specialist, who used a helicograph, a kind of semaphore, sent his last message asking permission of his Brit officer to stop signaling and go down and die spitting Afghans on his bayonet. Permission was granted, and he carefully packed up his helicograph, charged into the fight and died gloriously.

The only objection you could make, and it’s kind of a quibble, is that politically this is a little weird, like a bunch of Mexicans dying in defense of the Alamo. I mean, it was the Brits who wrecked the Sikh’s homeland and all. But see, that kind of nitpicking is what ruins war-nerding. If you ask me, the Sikhs who died at Saraghari were just doing what they do best. I mean, what boy didn’t dream of dying at the Alamo, or Thermopylae, or on the Bonhomme Richard? Not many of us get a chance to actually do it, and if you do, you don’t nitpick about who pays your wages, you just soak up the gloriousness of it and imagine the songs they’ll write about you, how you’ll look as a statue.

And that’s the great thing about being a Sikh, which I’m gonna be soon unless the beard turns out too scratchy: It’s still happening! The Golden Age of Sikhism is still in session! When the rest of the world is a convalescent home, you can count on the Punjab – along with the Horn of Africa, and the Congo — to keep the old ways going. And you can count on the Sikh to be there, doing a Little Big Horn or Alamo every few years to keep life sweet, and give me hope that there’s something better outside of this office life I’m stuck in.


140 Comments

Add your own

  • 1. Fizban  |  August 8th, 2012 at 8:04 am

    Loved it. So much! There was nothing else I read this morning that made me smile. Awww…nostalgia.

  • 2. Zoner  |  August 8th, 2012 at 8:23 am

    Damn, I miss the War Nerd. I hope Dolan and his wife haven’t been reduced to homelessness yet.

  • 3. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 8th, 2012 at 8:33 am

    This was one of the first War Nerds I ever read.

    So long ago.

  • 4. Craig A  |  August 8th, 2012 at 10:25 am

    War Nerd come back!

  • 5. mh505  |  August 8th, 2012 at 10:44 am

    I wholeheartedly second this, Craig A. The silence is deafening …

  • 6. Trevor  |  August 8th, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    Ever notice that when they need someone brown and bearded to beat down, all the whackadoos in this country go after Sikhs? As if being a racist asshole wasn’t enough, they have to go and torment the guys with the best track record of making war on Islam. This is why the American empire is such a slapstick failure – provincial idiocy rules.

  • 7. Corey  |  August 8th, 2012 at 1:49 pm

    This is going to annoy a lot of Sikhs me saying this (at any board you mention this it drives them berserk) but really the only Sikh I know much about is Kip Kinkel.

    He was that school shooter up in Canada who went nuts and shot up some college. He shot 20 and killed only one person.

    He didn’t have a beard or anything and he spent most of his time drinking, posting on his vampire-goth blog, and playing violent videogames, I’m not sure how much of a Sikh he really was.

  • 8. Corey  |  August 8th, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Ah crap, typo. I meant Kimveer Gill. I guess I got my K-letters-in-first-name school shooters mixed up.

  • 9. Sanjay  |  August 8th, 2012 at 2:00 pm

    These overblown tales of heroism are needed because the actual record of Sikhs is not very commendable.

    The Rajputs, Marathas, and many other tribes in India are braver than Sikhs.

    Also, the paragraph on 1971 Bangladesh war of independence is complete nonsense.

    Many Indian Generals and planners took part in training and equipping the Bengalis, not just the Punjabis.

    In fact the leading role in helping the Bengalis was played by Parsis, Tamils, Rajputs etc, not Punjabis.

    But Sikhs deliberately cultivate a pious image to attract, impress, deceive and back stab.

    History shows that Sikhs are one of the most violent people on earth.

    Sikhs use beards, long threatening knives, combs, Bengals, to segregate themselves. Why do they reject interracial marriage with Blacks and poor Hispanics.

    The Upper Caste Sikhs loot, maim, slaughter and persecute Lower caste Dalit Sikhs.

    Sikhs commit genocide of millions of baby girls in the womb. Punjab has the worst Sex Ratio in the World.

    Sikh Terrorists murdered 100,000 innocent civilians in India during 80s, 90s. Sikh terrorists blew up Air India flight 182 in Canada and murdered 350 passengers in 1985.

  • 10. The Dude  |  August 8th, 2012 at 2:15 pm

    Gary B. Singh, please come back. We all miss your truthful, un-PC articles telling us why why military history is actually interesting and warnings about the decline of the US military.

  • 11. 2012truth  |  August 8th, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    CNN just said the “sikh shooter” (i dunno what i did there) suicided himself – I guess the cops were lying about him being gunned down by courageous first-responders. Also by CNN’s reporting it looks like the dude picked up white supremacy in the Army.

  • 12. DrunktankDan  |  August 8th, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    I just read this over at the exile.ru site after the massacre cause i wanted to share it with people confused about sikhs. Goddamn I miss WN articles so much it hurts. Does he have health problems or something or is he just teaching someplace weird where he can’t risk his career again. Either way, it hurts. I need Brecher. I have bought 4 copies of his books and distributed them to friends with a not that always says “Don’t get too excited, he’s gone to us now.”
    Those glorious 40 days of blog was one of the best things that ever happened to me. It saved my current relationship (I am not making that up) and then off he goes into oblivion again. I just hope he is OK. I don’t even need an article or anything. I just want to know that he’s OK somewhere out there *sniff*

  • 13. DrunktankDan  |  August 8th, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    a note*
    This keyboard is a piece of shit. Sorry for typos.

  • 14. Rehmat  |  August 8th, 2012 at 7:56 pm

    Sikh religion was founded by Guru Nanak. He was born into a high-caste Hindu family on April 15, 1469. As a young boy, Nanak was introduced to Islam through his Muslim friends. Later he went to Baghdad to study Islam. In 1507 he proclaimed a new religion based on Islamic monotheism with Hindu traditions and culture. However, the modern Sikhism is not based on his teachings but the teachings of Guru Arjan, who compiled Sikhism holy book Guru Granth in 1601. The construction on the Darbar Sahib (or Harmandir; now also known as the Golden Temple) in Amritsar on the land donated by Mughal King Aurengzaib Almgir, was also completed in the same year. In 1857, Sikhs helped British colonialists to suppress Muslim-Hindu military resistance against foreign rulers. In 1947 Sikhs helped Hindu extremist groups to massacre nearly one million Muslim men, women and children for demanding a separate Muslim state of Pakistan.

    http://rehmat1.com/2012/08/07/wisconsin-sikh-temple-shooting-puzzle/

  • 15. anhourofwolves  |  August 8th, 2012 at 10:01 pm

    Sanjay,
    I notice that you leave out the one crucial detail about why Sikhs were up in arms in the 80′s culminating in the dispatching of that piece of trash Gandhi:
    They wanted what the Irish wanted from the British and what many Americans RIGHT NOW want : To secede and have their own free state, y’know, like a bunch of “domestic terrorists” agitated against their King on this continent back in the late 18th century?!

    If anyone’s curious, try the following Google searches (and switch to Images (left hand column, under Web)

    Sikhs World War 1
    Sikhs World War 2
    Hindus World War 1
    Hindus World War 2

    and see if you notice a common pattern in the results…Not many photos in the latter 2 searches eh? Wonder why that could be?

  • 16. matt  |  August 8th, 2012 at 10:44 pm

    The link about the Spanish mayor in the “what you should know” section is broken. Just a loyal exhole doing his duty, Amen.

  • 17. XYZ  |  August 8th, 2012 at 11:41 pm

    The only history that the war nerd knows anything about is the Civil War and perhaps the WW2. When it comes to Asian and in particular the subcontinents history, he is lost. It is too complex involving too many ethnic, religious and linguistic groups spread over a few thousand years. Poor Brecher, he needs to shed his American mentality.

    Sikhs do not wear a beard and grow their hair because only the Mughals were allowed this. The Mughals usually wore short hair and plenty of Hindus had long hair and sported long beards before the Sikhs. The Mughals did not care about long hair. Where does Brecher get crap like this from?

    Pontus was not Indian. Brecher was perhaps referring to Porus. Alexander actually turned back because of Magadha, not because of Porus who was a small timer in the then India. Porus commanded less than 50 war elephants against Alexander and the Greeko-Persian army sweated an bleeded against his numerically inferior army. Magadha brought more than 8000 war elephants as well as an army larger than Alexander’s, seeing which the Greeks pissed in their skirts and retreated. Magadha by the way was an Easter Indian kingdom and a predecessor of the Bengal and Bihar of modern India, the same Bengal that Brecher ridicules. Magadha also created the worlds largest land and maritime empire a century later, larger than Alexander’s, and exported Buddhism around Asia.

    The Bengalis have another achievement. In an other classic but ignorant article Brecher wrote about Tibet, he forgot to mention that it was the Benagli Pala kings who invaded Tibet and introduced Buddhism.

    Brecher forgets to mention the Marathas who actually put the first nails into the Mughal coffin. It was their shock defeat in 1781 against Abdali that allowed the Sikhs to grow in power.

    Brecher should grow up and study Sikh history properly before writing crap. He should probably stick to the Civil war, something simple enough for every American to understand.

  • 18. Narcoleptic  |  August 8th, 2012 at 11:49 pm

    I have a fantasy that Gary is taking time off to write an all-new WN book, appropriate for perusal on your Kindle or the display case at Barnes and Noble. Maybe it will even make Dolan some cash. I swear, even rereading Brecher brings a little joy to an otherwise meaningless day.

  • 19. DarthFurious  |  August 9th, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Ok, if I understand the gist of these posts, we are to assume that tribalism is alive and well in India?

  • 20. Douche  |  August 9th, 2012 at 8:05 am

    Very entertaining read. Although I’d like to point out, the “Afghans”, as you called them in your article, were not the ones who paved the way for the Mughal rule in India.

    It was Babur. And just so you know, Babur was a master tactician and one of the best war generals. He was a descendant of “Taimur” and “Genghis Khan”, so you can well guess the valour that he possessed.

  • 21. Bawdymonkey  |  August 9th, 2012 at 8:36 am

    Speaking of the continued relevance of Gary Brecher, now Axe commercials are eerily reminiscent of early passages in Dolan’s Pleasant Hell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRB0i9-AUQs

  • 22. Jay  |  August 9th, 2012 at 9:00 am

    I remember hearing an old story about the Sikhs in WWII. A new British captain had come in, and had heard of the ferocity of his new command.

    At his first mission briefing, he explained the plan. His men would drop from planes behind enemy lines and hit the enemy from the rear. When he asked for volunteers, he was dismayed to see that fewer than half were game.

    The Sikhs didn’t know about parachutes. They thought they were simply volunteering to jump out of a plane. When that detail was explained, volunteer rates soared.

  • 23. mh505  |  August 9th, 2012 at 9:05 am

    @XYZ
    who cares if he gets his facts wrong every now & then. His writings provide the best & most entertaining read on war-related issues far & wide; no matter the subject

  • 24. Vendetta  |  August 9th, 2012 at 10:09 am

    @19

    Indeed, I had an Indian friend who referred to them as “the Jews of India” and had plenty of Sikh jokes to tell, mostly around them not understanding how things like toilets or socks work.

  • 25. Toba  |  August 9th, 2012 at 10:22 am

    I have to agree with Sanjay about the violent nature of the Sikhs. Like attracts like. An unfortunate situation indeed but Fate demands that receipts be totaled at the end of the proverbial day.

  • 26. Jerome  |  August 9th, 2012 at 11:43 am

    @22

    I heard that same joke, but it was about the Gurkhas.

  • 27. gc  |  August 9th, 2012 at 2:05 pm

    @17

    Magadha also created the worlds largest land and maritime empire a century later, larger than Alexander’s

    The Mauryan empire bigger than Alexander’s? And Brecher’s supposed to be the provincial here?

    He should probably stick to the Civil war, something simple enough for every American to understand.

    Is there anything more pathetic than degenerate morons buying into the “Americans as post capitalist untutored savages” myth and thinking it makes them look sophisticated?

    (Answer: No.)

  • 28. DrunktankDan  |  August 9th, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    Calling the American Civil War “simple” is frustratingly stupid. Why argue with someone possessed of such an obviously biased mindset?

    Strange as it may seem, the WN really is a very culturally inclusive and color blind writer. He does his best to understand other cultural motivations, and praises martial glory regardless of race or ethnicity or what have you, while simultaneously acknowledging his own prejudices. A far cry from many of the provincial idiots commenting on this article

  • 29. outhere  |  August 9th, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    These days there are so much 4 War Nerd 2 comment on but apparently John Dolan went totally alcoholic & misanthrope

  • 30. xyz  |  August 9th, 2012 at 8:40 pm

    @27
    The best estimate of the size of Alexanders empire is about 2 million square miles. It is a bit of an over estimate due to the mythical place he enjoys in western history. Areas of north Africa which he never conquered are usually included in the maps. Similarly some areas of the Indus region and Afghanistan which he did not conquer are included. Kings from these regions allied with Alexander as they saw a chance to invade North India. Alexander was seen as a tool to further the ambitions of many a king.

    Now lets estimate the size of the Mauryan empire at its peak. The area of the Indian subcontinent and Afghanistan is 2 million square miles. Add to this the area of a quarter of modern Burma. Further add the area of Tajikistan, part of Uzbekistan and a small part of modern Iran, which Seleucus lost to Chadragupta. These areas amount to about 2.5 million square miles.

    Chandragupta gave a few hundred war elephants (small change for a decent sized Indian kingdom) to Seleucus after defeating him. This was in exchange for the territory east of Indus and north of Afghanistan. With the war elephants Seleucus won his tribal wars with other Greeks. These wars amongst the former Greeks kept most of Persia and West Asia in turmoil for a century and left the Mauryan empire alone. Thats how serious empires work.

    One should really add the cultural empire that Ashoka spawned in South East Asia through Buddhism and setting up Indian royal dynasties in Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam.

    Buddhism also spread further in Central Asia and eastern modern China giving Ashoka serious influence in these regions, influence of the type that Alexander never had.

    Its influence brought peace and relative economic stability (absence of mass masacares) to the Indian subcontinent till the 7th century A.D. to Indian subcontinet.

    The Mauryan empire beat Alexanders not just in size but had a more lasting legacy.

    The problem with most western historians, political pundits and war nerds is that they view the world through a Greeko-Roman lens. The Greek and Roman empires were really B-grade empires even at their peak compared to the ones in Asia.

  • 31. foo  |  August 9th, 2012 at 9:00 pm

    > Sikhs World War 1
    > Sikhs World War 2
    > Hindus World War 1
    > Hindus World War 2

    You *do* understand that Sikhs are all of Hindu ethnicity and race right ? Like *all* of them ? bats eyelashes..

  • 32. duh  |  August 10th, 2012 at 3:26 am

    Well, yeah, naturally all Sikhs are Hindu race and ethnicity. Much like how an Italian atheist is still racially Catholic. Which is to say, no, not really, actually not at all.

    If you accept your parent’s religion and habits without question it does not mean that said religion has soaked down to the genetic level. It just means you are a very submissive person. Please refrain from confusing race and religion.

  • 33. gc  |  August 10th, 2012 at 4:28 am

    The best estimate of the size of Alexanders empire is about 2 million square miles. It is a bit of an over estimate due to the mythical place he enjoys in western history. Areas of north Africa which he never conquered are usually included in the maps. Similarly some areas of the Indus region and Afghanistan which he did not conquer are included. Kings from these regions allied with Alexander as they saw a chance to invade North India…

    Now lets estimate the size of the Mauryan empire at its peak. The area of the Indian subcontinent and Afghanistan is 2 million square miles. Add to this the area of a quarter of modern Burma…

    “We really shouldn’t count tributaries like Cyrnaica as part of Alexander’s empire. Now let’s count tributaries – southern India, and western Burma – as part of the Mauryan empire!”

    Maps for those of you playing at home:

    http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/macedonian_empire_336_bc.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maurya_Dynasty_in_265_BCE.jpg

    Its influence brought peace and relative economic stability (absence of mass masacares) to the Indian subcontinent till the 7th century A.D. to Indian subcontinet.

    The Mauryan empire beat Alexanders not just in size but had a more lasting legacy.

    The “peace and economic stability until the 7th century” bit is simply bullshit.

    As for the “lasting legacy”, whatever credit the Mauryan empire deserves for spreading Buddhism, Alexander likewise desrves for spreading Greek culture to western Asia and vise versa – with said interaction eventually producing both Christianity and Islam, among other things.

    The problem with most western historians, political pundits and war nerds is that they view the world through a Greeko-Roman lens. The Greek and Roman empires were really B-grade empires even at their peak compared to the ones in Asia.

    And that’s simply stupid. (“B-grade empires.”)

    The problem with viewing the world through a “Graeco-Roman lense” – insofar as anybody even does anymore – is not that it overlooks Asia. It’s that Greece, Rome, and Asia are all only marginally relevant to the event that produced the modern world – the advent of mass literacy, starting in Scandinavia and Germany. (First prominent result: The Protestant/Catholic schism in the 16th century.)

    And while we’re generalizing: The problem with many non-Western historians is that, with the slightest of pretexts, they will go through tremendous intellectual contortions to convince themselves that used to be more advanced than the West. (For any and all dates up through the 19th century, after which it becomes impossible to even pretend anymore.) This because they (wrongly) feel unbearably humiliated by the fact that modernity began in the West, and that the West briefly enjoyed a kind of ascendancy over them that they will never enjoy in turn.

    Of course, plenty of Western historians do this too, wanting to establish their multicultural credentials.

    Your actually relatively lucky as these types go. At least you have the Mauryas to work with. The poor Africans have to settle for trying to convince themselves that Mali was the equal of Rome.

  • 34. harry  |  August 10th, 2012 at 7:01 am

    If I win the powerball loto, then I’ll fund a TV series based on the articles of the WN. Showtime would pick it up.

  • 35. Ozinator  |  August 10th, 2012 at 10:24 am

    I discovered the exiled when having a goof with some friends about end times and stumbled across this… http://exiledonline.com/class-war-survival-tips-gun-shopping-guide/

    the article was funny but the comments section had us crying in laughter. It also showed how dumb and smart the comments section was.

    I then read a WN article I can’t recall (Bosnia maybe?) and the authors understanding was very nerdy but also very poor. The groupies in the comments section were embarrassing and I stopped reading the site until a link took me to a Ames piece. I had no idea about Ames or Levine or Dolan and their real and savage journalism found here. If Dolan is the same guy as Brecher, I agree with XYZ but would also suggest he not cover any war history

  • 36. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 10th, 2012 at 10:24 am

    If I win the powerball loto, then I’ll fund a TV series based on the articles of the WN. Showtime would pick it up.

    “Tales From The War Nerd”

    It’ld be so awesome.

    If the eXile hasn’t still gotten it’s cinematic representation, at least it would’ve gotten it’s televisual one.

  • 37. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 10th, 2012 at 10:27 am

    The War Nerd Chronicles

    Sounds better than “Tales From” or my X-Files preference “War Nerd Files”.

    It’ld also fit right in with the Game of Thrones fad running around right now.

  • 38. DrunktankDan  |  August 10th, 2012 at 11:02 am

    @34 And I would watch it every day and probably jack off too if my girlfriend wasn’t around.

  • 39. XYZ  |  August 10th, 2012 at 11:29 am

    @34
    So what is the numerical estimate of the area of Alexander’s empire?
    In my first estimate of the area of the Mauryan empire, I did not include any part of Burma, but did include what you call ‘South India’, which still makes the Mauryan empire as large as Alexander’s. Note also that I did not include Central Asian regions that Seleucus lost to Chadragupta. Actually if anything this makes Chandragupta a greater conqueror than Alexander. His empire persisted and did not die with him.

    Laws and taxation determine whether a tributary is a legitimate part of an empire. Ashoka’s edicts and inscriptions on law exist in TamilNadu, the region you refer to as south India. Fragmentary tax records that exist show annual tributes from every part of the subcontinent.

    If southern India is not part of the Maurayn empire, then one should consider Texas (or other states) as a ‘tributary’ to the USA. Texas has its own flag, its own ‘supreme court’, its own constitution and its own ‘militias’. They even have a secessionist ‘movement’.

    There is a reason ‘South India’ is even shown as a tributary and not as an equal part of an empire. This is due to the British revisionism of the 19th century. Early Brit textbooks an historians tried their best to depict an India that never existed as political or a social unit until the arrival of the British. This prevented a sound intellectual basis for a united fight against the colonial rule. This persists in texts and history departments around the world including in India. The Brits also supported the Tamils(amongst a few others like the Parsis, and a section of the Bengalis and Punjabis) in India and Srilanka as their chosen tribe to implement their policies. The gave the Tamils special status and independent history and culture. The tamils could consider themselves as low level allies instead of subjects. Read up the Warnerd’s article on LTTE. He gets the part right, where the Brits propped up the Tamils.

    But as I said Indian history can be fairly complex. It is much simpler and dumb to use wikipedia maps as you have done.

    I do not deny the great achievements of Western Europe in the last three centuries. Nor do I deny the achievements of ancient Greece or Rome. However as political units they were B-grade. How long did the Greek empire last really? In some sense not even while Alexander was alive. An empire that is plagued by rebellions is not a strong one.

    Name one large scale massacare in India between the 2nd century BC and the 7th century AD. Kings and their dynasties get killed, but cities are not burnt down, looted or pillaged. That is the Mauryan legacy.

    What is the lasting Greek legacy? Is it political? cultural? scientific and philosophical? The western advances of the modern era are based more on Islamic knowledge from Persians, Arabs as well as the Indians and the Chinese and less so on a Greek legacy. Most of the ancient Greek knowledge in astronomy and geometry was known in India and Persia a few centuries before it arrived in Greece. The Greeks and Romans insisted on remaining ignorant about the Hindu number system. Republics and Democracies thrived in India before 1000 BC a few centuries earlier than in Greece and Rome. So what exactly is the unique legacy of Greece? The one lasting Greek legacy is probably the 7 day week, although I am not entirely sure whether it was Greek in origin or near Eastern. Oh and they left a few of their genes in Central Asia as did all conquerors before and after them. But the Greeks probably had their origin in northern Persia in prehistory.

    I will certainly take issue with your implication that the ‘West’ (whatever that is) was more advanced than Asia (at some point in the distant past). In just about every respect; culture, trade, wealth, science and philosophy, Greece and Rome were provincial backwaters in 500 BC. It is the modern semi educated western mindset that falsely transposes modern greatness to the ancient era.

    The ‘poor Africans’ had Egypt, Nubia, Carthage, Ethiopia and Somalia. Why stick with Mali. But hey they were not Rome. (Validates my point about your Greeco-Roman lens.)

    Anyway I thought the article was about the Sikhs. But then apparently we cannot avoid talk about Alexander in anything about Persia, Afghanistan or India. Connecting the 18th century Sikhs to Porus who fought Alexander two millenia before is plain stupid. The Sikhs are an awesome martial group, but they do not need an ‘Alexander connection’ to be admired thus. Validates my point about the nauseating Greeco-Roman perspective.

  • 40. Rehmat  |  August 10th, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Vendetta – your friend is either a nerd or anti-Semite. In India the upper-caste Brahmins are Jews among the Hindus, while most of early converts to Sikhism were No.2 Hindu caste “Khashtra”.

    V.T. Rajshekar, editor fortnightly Dalit Voice, Bangalore (India) wrote: “India’s Brahminical rulers called the “Jews of India”, being blood brothers of the Jews, are in tight embrace to fight their latest enemies Islam. Israel fears attack from the nuclear armed Iran. India’s 2% Brahmins cannot survive without war and violence which are their staple diet. Both the Jews and the “Jews of India” say they have been able to win over President Obama to tackle their common enemy. But our friend Alan Hart fears another anti-Jew violence in the West. We have the same fears in India: the rise of anti-Brahmin war and violence. The unity of China with Iran, Pakistan and other revolutionary Islamic forces including Palestine plus the Indian original inhabitants will produce a gigantic force before which the micro-minority Jews and “Jews of India” will pale into insignificance…..”

    http://rehmat1.com/2010/04/09/jews-and-brahmins-%E2%80%93-birds-of-a-feather/

  • 41. gc  |  August 10th, 2012 at 2:09 pm

    I do not deny the great achievements of Western Europe in the last three centuries

    “Okay, guess there’s no way to pretend we were superior to them while they were colonizing us. But before that we were! Honest!”

    It is the modern semi educated western mindset

    “The modern west is semi educated! Because they don’t study ‘Selectively reading history to make vain descendents of colonized peoples feel better about themselves.’”

  • 42. gc  |  August 10th, 2012 at 2:15 pm

    Forgot this part:

    There is a reason ‘South India’ is even shown as a tributary and not as an equal part of an empire. This is due to the British revisionism of the 19th century.

    No, this is due to the Mauryas never having conquered it.

  • 43. Diablo  |  August 10th, 2012 at 2:28 pm

    I just graduated from a college that has a significant Muslim/Hindu/Sikh population. As a white dude, I stood out like a sore thumb.

    All I know is that the Sikhs were always at least 4 inches taller on average than everyone else. That and they made the best engineering design team partners as they didn’t screw around when it came to scheduling or putting in the effort.

    A buddy of mine dragged me to one of their temples for the weekend service (I was raised Catholic). It was a real eye opener as pretty much they prayed and then spent the rest of the day preparing meals and feeding the homeless who came to the temple. Pretty much all the folks had to do was take off the shoes. There wasn’t any pushing of the religion or anything. Totally bizarre compared to what I had seen in other religious settings.

    They had moved into one of the most violent, drug infested parts of town and within 5 years, the crime dropped to next to nothing. Our locals love them. Real shame about that Wisconsin fuck.

  • 44. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 10th, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    Jo Bole So Nihal,
    Sat Sri Akal.

  • 45. zhubajie  |  August 10th, 2012 at 6:56 pm

    “Before him even those lazy necrophiliac Egyptians had a stab at the Punjab. I couldn’t believe it when I read it, but apparently those Nile-side loungers had the energy to attack the Punjab.”

    Only in Greek legend, not reality. The pharoahs occasionally expanded into neighboring regions (Sudan, the Levant) but mostly concentrated on their homeland.

  • 46. zhubajie  |  August 10th, 2012 at 7:06 pm

    @30. XYZ, Alexander’s empire was basically the Achaemenian Persian Empire, but far less stable or well-governed. His generals fought amongst themselves untill they were over-run by the Romans (west half) and the Parthians (east half).

    Check out Parthia.com, Achemenet.com and Pierre Briant, _From Cyrus to Alexander_.

    I always marvel at the numbers of people East and West who still fall for Alexander’s cult of personality.

  • 47. XYZ  |  August 10th, 2012 at 9:48 pm

    @42
    GC,
    So you are dead certain that the Mauryas never conquered southern India, because… of a map on Wikipedia. You know if you know take out the area of TamilNadu and Kerala from the Maurayn empire, it still beats Alexanders. Of course I am not sure you could fact search and add numbers.

    I also explained the proof for the conquest of all India by the Mauryans, but you insist on trusting a map from Wikipedia, a map whose source is a Brit book from the pet Brit industry of distorting history.

    Most Westerners have absolutely zero knowledge of history and politics of the rest of the world, despite their easy access to information. In this sense they are uneducated, hopelessly so.
    You indulge in the classic logical error that many in the West commit –
    The West created great empires, built great cultures, science and technology in the last 300 years. Ergo the west must have always been great.

    Actually it is precisely this sort of bullshit that prevents Americans and Europeans from learning from the downfall of other powers. It is precisely this sort of arrogance and ignorance that today contributes to their slow decay.

  • 48. XYZ  |  August 10th, 2012 at 10:02 pm

    @45 @46
    Zhubajie, Yes I cannot stop marveling about the cult of Alexander. He did try to create a cult around himself, but European historians made him into a demiGod.

    The big European powers of the 19th century; Britain, France, Germany, Austria and Russia did not have a strong mythical history in the distant past. So they latched on to Alexander as the archetype of the European/ Occidental hero conquering Asia/Orient.
    Alexander and the Greeks are portrayed as
    enlightened conquerors. We get bullshit about Alexander’s teacher being Aristotle. This supposedly makes him an intellectual, an archetype for the later enlightened European conqueror who can in good conscience slaughter the inferior races.
    (Well George Bush went to Harvard, does that make him a philosopher-conqueror?)

    Even roman history was appropriated by these former subjects of Rome. Roman conquests in Asia are still portrayed as a victory for Europe. This notwithstanding the fact Rome was culturally a Mediterranean power rather than a European one.

  • 49. XYZ  |  August 10th, 2012 at 10:24 pm

    @28 DrunktankDan,
    I seem to have ruffled you by calling the American civil war simple. I am sorry, I forget that it is the one major war that America fought in the 19th century. Killing Native Americans does not count. The Mexican war is not gran enough. Besides not many Americans are keen on talking about it since you want to delegitimize Mexican immigrants. Not good to encourage the idea that America was an aggressor that took away Mexican territory just a 150 years ago.Every other American ‘military campaign’ in the 19th century was a land grab from inconsequential powers or Coast guard action against a bunch of pirates.

    So you are left with the Civil war. Actually it is the one major war that America fought alone in the last 200 years.

    About half a million people dead, while being an impressive kill count, pales in comparison with almost the century long series of wars through out Asia. And it certainly pales in comparison with what followed in the 20th century. It really was a minor civil war, the sort that was regular stuff through out the rest of the world 200 years ago.

    I know that Americans like to argue and discuss to death about the reasons for the war. Slavery, State rights etc… we get it, it is the one real war you had in the 19th century and you want to show it off. As much as I enjoyed the War nerds articles on the Civil War, Civil war references in everything do get boring.

  • 50. Derp  |  August 10th, 2012 at 11:46 pm

    Goddamn, this Wade Michael guy is a fucking idiot! He sure pisses me off!

    Doesn’t he know the difference between a mosque and Gurdwara? Shit! I keep telling all my homeboys down at Storm Front that if they want vandalize a mosque, well, I don’t condone violence, even though I don’t like them sand niggers, just don’t confuse a mosque for a Gurdwara or Devalayam and just know the motherfucking difference and that not every brown person is a sand nigger or a Mexican! Some idiots just don’t know shit, derp!

  • 51. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 11th, 2012 at 1:08 am

    I would put Alexander in the same category as the Mongols. A man who smashed international boundaries across Eurasia, allowing channels to open for trade, cross cultural pollination, exchange of languages, an establishment of a basic language (Greek) that allowed communication and for a short time, a level of integration.

  • 52. james  |  August 11th, 2012 at 9:52 am

    oh war nerd, some of the best writing with the most casual tone. Dolan, please more! You introduced me to Eddie Little, like a Holden Caulfield thrashing against phoneys.

  • 53. gc  |  August 11th, 2012 at 11:34 am

    So you are dead certain that the Mauryas never conquered southern India, because… of a map on Wikipedia.

    No, I’m certain the Mauryas never conquered southern India because the Mauryas never conquered southern India.

    Most Westerners have absolutely zero knowledge of history and politics of the rest of the world…

    You indulge in the classic logical error that many in the West commit –
    The West created great empires, built great cultures, science and technology in the last 300 years. Ergo the west must have always been great.

    No.

    You don’t know anything about the West. Except that they colonized you for three hundred years and are richer and more powerful than you today – those facts effect you too directly to be ignored.

    You know those two things, and otherwise simply believe what you want to believe. (Possibly supplemented by some hackwork book or website telling you the Suppressed Truth – meaning what you want to hear.) And, because you’re a narcissistic twit, think it’s history.

    And what you come up with is: “Okay, they conquered us. And they’re richer and more powerful than us today. But before that, we were always better than them! And it’ll be that way again! It was all a fluke, I tell you! Indians (or Chinese or Arabs or Africans or whatever) are the master race!”

    You’re not anything that most of the people in this comments section haven’t seen before. It’s impossible to throw a hackeysack on any reasonably prestigious college campus in America or western Europe without hitting one of you, or to go anywhere or the internet where politics is discussed without meeting you – dumb, vain developing world elites, and vocationally pious Westerners.

    Brecher, in the other hand, is unique. In a good way.

  • 54. gc  |  August 11th, 2012 at 11:37 am

    Actually it is precisely this sort of bullshit that prevents Americans and Europeans from learning from the downfall of other powers. It is precisely this sort of arrogance and ignorance that today contributes to their slow decay.

    “You will pay for your effrontery, not telling me I’m better than you!”

    Any day now!

  • 55. Vendetta  |  August 11th, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    @40

    He’s more of an idiot, actually.

  • 56. zhubajie  |  August 11th, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    @47 XYZ: “Most Westerners have absolutely zero knowledge of history and politics of the rest of the world, despite their easy access to information.”

    Even worse, much of what they *think* they know is not so.

    Zhu

  • 57. zhubajie  |  August 11th, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    @53 gc: “Except that they colonized you for three hundred years and are richer and more powerful than you today”

    But now are in serious decline. I think it started with the rise of Japan, about a century ago. Now China and India are regaining their long-term eminence. Meanwhile, Americans try to speed up the end of the world by invading countries mentioned in the Book of Revelation!

    Zhu

  • 58. gc  |  August 11th, 2012 at 8:49 pm

    @57

    Yup, China’s going to crush us with its mastery of low birthrates, cheap labor, and authoritarianism.

  • 59. atlas_lied  |  August 11th, 2012 at 11:02 pm

    it’s not china, or india, or anyone else crushing the US. it’s the US’ self-defeat and its seeming arrogance and delusions of grandeur, even as it is free falling.

    take any econ course in the US, and you’ll feel as if you understand the economy via equilibrium graphs. then read michael hudson or richard wolff or any of the post keynesian or marxist economists that have been ostracized by mainstream academia. it’s no comparison. you’ll suddenly realize that living standards (for the vast majority) have fallen for several decades, but people have been too busy with people magazine and blaming mexicans to notice their own plight.

    then you get the reflexive USA-firsters and xenophobes who scoff at any talk of decline, regardless of the empirical evidence.

  • 60. gc  |  August 12th, 2012 at 1:41 am

    @59

    you’ll suddenly realize that living standards (for the vast majority) have fallen for several decades

    You “suddenly realized” that? Welcome to reality; some of us have already been here for a while.

    Of course America’s gone to hell in the last forty years. It’s just that there’s even more wrong with the other huge countries than there is with us, and the other developed countries are all much smaller than we are.

    Anyway, don’t be defeatist. America has come close to oligarchy before, and then the Great Depression and the New Deal haopened. They lost that time, and there’s no reason they have to win this time.

  • 61. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 12th, 2012 at 8:38 am

    dumb, vain developing world elites

    Eh. Hope I don’t come across as dumb.

    Before this debate began, I thought I just wanted to toss in the analogy that crediting the Mauryan Empire for the end of Alexander’s Empire, is like crediting the United States for the end of the Soviet Union.

    Also, a more generalised sense, of either war weariness, or fears that they had reached the end of the world, was what put Alexander’s troops in revolt.

    For God’s sake, the man and his army defeated the Persian Empire and subjugated what we now call Turkey and Afghanistan. Those are insane populations and territories to conquer and then for the rest of your life, hold.

    America has come close to oligarchy before, and then the Great Depression and the New Deal haopened

    Yeah, but what if this time it isn’t a General Smedley Butler type they choose for their coup?

  • 62. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 12th, 2012 at 8:39 am

    Hey, gc, what HTML do you use to isolate chunks of text on this board?

  • 63. Rehmat  |  August 12th, 2012 at 10:41 am

    History of Indian sub-Continent is witness that Hidus have never a unified country unless ruled by foreigners. The subcontinent had some 5,000 large and tiny States, ruled by Hindu Rajas, who kept fighting with each other. Islam came to the subcontinent through Muslim traders visiting Malabar and other western coastal areas during the 7th century. Malabar became the first state which produced local converts, who were persecuted by the local Hindu rulers and prevented them from performing Hajj – which prompted Syrian governor to send his 19-year-old son-in-law, Muhammad Bin Qassam to teach a lesson to Raja Dahir. Muhammad Bin Qassam defeated Raja Dahir in 711 and brough areas upto Multan (Pakistan) under Muslim rule. However, the Muslim invaders who made subcontinent their permanent home – came from North, through Khyber Pass from Afghanistan. In the eleventh century Mahmood Ghaznavi invaded northern part of subcontinent for 17 times – but never established a permanent occupation. It was during the middle period of Mughal Empire (1526-1857 CE) that almost entire Indian subcontinent including Afghanistan became one country ruled from Delhi. It was this country, less Afghanistan, which British occupied after the failure of 1857 Hindu-Muslim resistance, also known as first ‘Battle of Independence’.

    Since its independence from British Raj on August 15, 1947 – there are close to one hundred local resistance groups fighting against Hindu upper-class dominated Indian government. Most of these religious and ethnic minority resistance groups beget their violence from the rising Hindu religious terrorism based on racism. These groups operate in Assam (31), Nagaland (21), Meghalaya (5), and Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (34). Two of India’s prime ministers, Indira Gandhi and her son Rajiv Gandhi (d.1984) were assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards and a Tamil Hindu woman.

    http://rehmat1.com/2008/12/03/india-an-artificial-state/

  • 64. gc  |  August 12th, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    Eh. Hope I don’t come across as dumb.

    Not you! You’re beautiful. That was directed at XYZ Affair.

    To isolate blocks of text, put them between “” and “, minus the quotation marks and hyphens.

  • 65. gc  |  August 12th, 2012 at 12:43 pm

    Aw, you’re kidding me. Okay, let’s try this again.

    To isolate blocks of text, use

    and

    without the line breaks.

  • 66. gc  |  August 12th, 2012 at 12:46 pm

    Oh for Christ’s sake.

    Okay, you know how you do italics? Isolating text works the same way, except instead of putting “i” and “/i” between the arrow brackets, you put “blockquote” and “/blockquote”.

  • 67. gc  |  August 12th, 2012 at 12:53 pm

    History of Indian sub-Continent is witness that Hidus have never a unified country unless ruled by foreigners

    And now we’re erring in the opposite direction.

    The Mauryas did unite nearly the entire continent, less a couple of kingdoms in the far south that were friendly to them anyway, and plus some of Afghanistan and Burma.

  • 68. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 12th, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Rehmat, itna bhi nahi.

    The subcontinent had Ashoka the Great and Akbar the Great. So two “… the Greats”.

    Ashoka was definitely Hindu and with Akbar marrying a Rajput princess to produce Jahangir, that localised that dynasty as well.\

    And so the Indian Subcontinent was united on two occasions. Akbar and Ashoka.

    And south India was vassalled up.

  • 69. zhubajie  |  August 12th, 2012 at 3:40 pm

    “America has come close to oligarchy before”

    The USA has never escaped oligarchy, 1607 to present.

  • 70. zhubajie  |  August 12th, 2012 at 3:44 pm

    @58 No, gc, the Chinese will let the Americans destroy themselves, while they enjoy Chinese food and naps after lunch.

  • 71. zhubajie  |  August 12th, 2012 at 9:00 pm

    @61 Punjabi From Karachi: “Yeah, but what if this time it isn’t a General Smedley Butler type they choose for their coup?”

    9-11 was the excuse for a silent coup. Unitary Executive is lightly disguised autocracy. Congress and Supreme Court, etc., are now just decoration, as in PR China or the earlier Roman Empire. The real decisions are made in private by Caesar and the equivalent of court eunuchs and imperial freedmen, actors not at all well-known to the public. The decisions are enforced with disappearances, secret prisons, drones, etc., etc.

  • 72. zhubajie  |  August 12th, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    @2 I hope the Dolans have retired to Thailand and are helping bar-girls write “Hello my big big honey” letters. A secret prison for maligning the American University of Iraq is at least as likely. Or death in a bus crash.

  • 73. XYZ  |  August 12th, 2012 at 11:13 pm

    @53 @54
    GC,
    ——————————————
    No, I’m certain the Mauryas never conquered southern India because the Mauryas never conquered southern India.
    You don’t know anything about the West.
    —————————————-
    You are certain that the Mauryas never conquered southern India, because…you are certain. This piece of divine truth was perhaps faxed to you from heavens.

    We Indians do know a fair a bit about the ‘West’. Millions of us know your language which helps in understanding America. We study your history, politics and culture Remember many of us study and work in the US.

    On the other hand, Americans have no clue about India. How many of you can speak any Indian language? You get your history from biased 19th century British racists. At best I encounter hippie fucks who spout spiritual bullshit, or those who visited the Taj Mahal and ocasionally eat chicken curry.

    ———————————————It’s impossible to throw a hackeysack on any reasonably prestigious college campus in America or western Europe without hitting one of you
    ———————————————
    Ah, so we attend reasonably prestigious colleges, eh? Quite true. (Although there are lots of us attending third rate colleges, paying to keep the colleges on life support).

    On the same college campuses at top schools I encountered dumb birthers, white supremacists, climate change deniers, bible thumping creationists, constitution thumping libertarians and Rand cultists. Perhaps this is the reason why science, math and engineering grad programs are full of Asians. Where I went to grad school most of the Americans existed simply because quite a bit of the Federal funding could be given only to Americans.

    (Disclaimer – I do personally know plenty of smart of Americans. But they seem to be such a small segment of the population. With all the resources America has (but is fast losing) one would expect the opposite. Even these smart educated Americans are usually clueless about the rest of the world.)

  • 74. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 12th, 2012 at 11:45 pm

    Like this?

  • 75. Punjabi From Karachi  |  August 12th, 2012 at 11:45 pm

    Thanks GC!

  • 76. gc  |  August 13th, 2012 at 1:34 am

    @70

    “Your decadent American belief that workers are entitled to lunch breaks will lead to your downfall!”

    Good luck with that.

    (Not that all American workers do get lunch breaks.)

  • 77. Rehmat  |  August 13th, 2012 at 3:34 am

    Punjabi from Karachi – Badshahoo thawadi te matt mary gaee-eh.

    Ashoka never ruled the entire Indian-subcontinent. It was only Emperors Akbar and Aurengzeb who ruled the present-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.

    Now, even Indian human-rights activist and author, Arundhati Roy, claims that state of Jummu and Kashmir doesn’t belong to India.

    http://rehmat1.com/2010/12/01/arundhati-roy-kashmir-is-not-part-of-india/

  • 78. Carpenter  |  August 13th, 2012 at 6:58 am

    @Sanjay:

    “History shows that Sikhs are one of the most violent people on earth.

    Sikhs use beards, long threatening knives, combs, Bengals, to segregate themselves. Why do they reject interracial marriage with Blacks and poor Hispanics.”

    For the same reason Mahatma Gandhi wrote letters protesting that Indians in South Africa had to live in Black neighborhood, and were restricted to use firearms the same way Blacks were. Indians, like Jews and Chinese and what have you, only vote for Democrats and sing cumbayah when it is convenient to bring in their own brethren. But like most of the planet (including most Latinos) they don’t want to live near Blacks.

    Gandhi’s words:

    http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi4.htm

    In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?

    “Now let us turn our attention to another and entirely unrepresented community-the Indian. He is in striking contrast with the native. While the native has been of little benefit to the State, it owes its prosperity largely to the Indians.”

    “In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?”

    “The petition is non-Indian in character, although British Indians, being coloured people, are very largely affected by it. We consider that it was a wise policy on the part of the British Indians throughout South Africa, to have kept themselves apart and distinct from the other coloured communities in this country.”

    “We believe as much in the purity of race as we think they do, only we believe that they would best serve these interests, which are as dear to us as to them, by advocating the purity of all races, and not one alone. We believe also that the white race of South Africa should be the predominating race.”

    Long post this. But I so do enjoy to burst fake globalist history bubbles. Those Sikhs? Probably fought well with rifles, even though they could never invent ships or the light bulb. But before the anti-European cheer brigade starts at it, remember most Sikhs heed Gandhi’s words about comingling with the Africans.

  • 79. gc  |  August 13th, 2012 at 8:32 am

    We Indians do know a fair a bit about the ‘West”

    No, you don’t. You think you do, because you’re too dumb, and too insulated from the consequences of being dumb, to know how dumb you are.

    “You” meaning you and other Asiatrash elites, not Indians in general.

    Millions of us know your language which helps in understanding America. We study your history, politics and culture Remember many of us study and work in the US.

    Case in point.

    “I know about Western history because I know English and went to school in America!”

  • 80. Pud  |  August 13th, 2012 at 2:34 pm

    I leave for a bit (actually went to Russia and figured things out for myself, rather than lap up the bullshit The Exile used to “report”.) and not only has this place gone hell bent for leather left, you’ve got to dig up old ass War Nerd?

    Fucked and chucked. Loser.

  • 81. super390  |  August 13th, 2012 at 7:54 pm

    gc,

    Asia-trash elites are not the only ones laying out the case for the collapse of the American empire. You cannot doubt the Eurocentric credentials of Kevin Phillips, the man who proposed the Southern Strategy to Nixon and then realized it was a cancer eating away at America’s frontal lobes. He wrote two prophetic books in the years immediately before the 2008 crash, “American Theocracy”, on his argument that imperial senility in Spain, the Netherlands, and Britain took the form of faith-based bubblenomics, and “Bad Money”, which concentrates on our financial sector’s ruinous course.

    The point is, he can’t describe a way out. The urban, proletarian America of the New Deal is dead. We are brainwashed and physically controlled by the corporate trinity of cars, suburbs and TV, all new phenomena in human history. In his early career he described the normal cyclical forces that rebalance American politics, but those have ceased to function because half the country wants to go back to an unjust, racist past to restore purity and greatness, and the other half don’t want to be bothered at all.

  • 82. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 2:27 am

    @81

    The Emerging Republican Majority guy thinks America is doomed? Oh lordy, we’re really in trouble now!

    He wrote two prophetic books in the years immediately before the 2008 crash, “American Theocracy”, on his argument that imperial senility in Spain, the Netherlands, and Britain took the form of faith-based bubblenomics

    ^ This should have been a heads up if his cv wasn’t already.

    The term “imperial senility”, the idea that there’s a master principle that explains the decline of all empires in history, and the facile analogy between 17th century Spain and 21st century America are all superstitious nonsense. (As if countries were organisms a la Oswald Spengler.)

    Spain, the Netherlands, and Britain’s relative power each declined for different specific reasons.

    Spain because it was far removed from the literacy revolution spreading out of Germany (unlike England and France, which benefited from their proximity); because its union with the Holy Roman Empire was too logistically problematic to last long under any circumstances; and because the Reformation reduced to Empire to a fragmented shadow of its former self anyway.

    The Netherlands because they were always a tiny country that thrived for a while by carrying goods between other countries and manufacturing their raw materials, until their clients cut out the middle man.

    Britain because the windfall they enjoyed when their old rival France was taken out of contention by its falling birthrate ended with the emergence of a united, industrailized Germany; and because their colonial subjects were becoming too well organized (as a result of a growing educated elite) and too numerous (as a result of exposure to Western medicine and medical knowledge) to control.

    The urban, proletarian America of the New Deal is dead.

    Urban, proletarian America is alive and well, though nowadays it’s Latino and black rather than Irish, Italian, eastern European, and black.

    Maybe you mean that the America of industrial union workers is dead, which is true enough, for America and all developed countries. Even in today’s net exporters of manufactured goods – Germany and Japan – the number of people employed in manufacturing is, of course, a tiny fraction of what it used to be.

    The question is whether, and how, today’s proletariat, mostly employed in the service industry, can organize to be as effective as the proletariat of the 30s. It’s still early days. An encouraging sign is that the rich are clearly scared.

    In his early career he described the normal cyclical forces that rebalance American politics, but those have ceased to function

    When an Eisenhower Republican complains that the “balance” has gone out of American politics, the correct answer is “Good!”

    We are brainwashed and physically controlled by the corporate trinity of cars, suburbs and TV

    Americatrash. (Ameritrash?)

    Christ, you might as well just start explicitly quoting early 70s John Lennon lyrics and be done with it.

  • 83. spf15  |  August 14th, 2012 at 4:59 am

    @gc
    ————————————–
    “You” meaning you and other Asiatrash elites, not Indians in general.
    ————————————–

    Translation: I am a racist piece of garbage, but maybe if I put it like that, the skinny brown bastards clogging up the interwebs will be too stupid to notice. And now if only all this immigrant trash would clear out of our red white and blue (no brown in there, suckas) campuses, my life would be beautiful.

    Newsflash for gc and ilk: Quite a few Indians, to put it gently, don’t actually need to go to American colleges to read the internets and shit. This would be obvious to many, but I will spell it out for gc.

    I don’t know why this guy, meaning gc, is getting his panties all in a bunch here, BTW. Gary (or whatever his real name is) is an entertaining writer. Everybody knows this and which is why we are all here. But at least some of us also know that he is quite generous with the facts, especially when venturing outside his domain of comfort and writing about the Great Eastern Wastelands. Never allows facts to get in the way of a good yarn, dear old Gary.

    He elevates Sikhs to a weird cult status, who are just a bunch of people, many of whom I’ve met (I am not a Sikh) and am quite sure if it came to a gunfight or fistfight, the odds would be even, so to speak. Or maybe they won’t, but there is only one way to find out ;-) Most of them are just as concerened about self-preservation as the rest of us; these are not a gaggle of martyrs-to-be waiting in the wings for their gloriously gory exit. What a ridiculous notion.

    He further takes a generous dig at Bengalis, who, from everything I’ve read were the leading revolutionaries against the British occupation of India. Only folks to organize local militias and cobbled-together armies against the British. So things are not so clear cut, especially to people who have lived in the middle of these things.

    It would be madness to think that Gary would write so and that a bunch of Indo-Pak types reading this wouldn’t jump on it and call it they way their beady black eyes saw it.

    So all XYZ really did was point this out. Quite correctly so. He also said that Americans have a simplistic view of these things. Quite correct again. I don’t see how this can be otherwise. Not many Americans have actually lived in India, don’t speak the language and their only exposure to India is the quiet brown guy in the office who magically makes the emails work and smells faintly of curry.

    gc (and this is a truly frightening thought) is probably one of the more motivated Yanks. He at least has the energy and inclination to look up the Mauryas. Most Americans who’ve worked for me, those I’ve worked with, and whom I’ve worked for have absolutely zero interest in these things.

    XYZ made some good points, gc tried to counter with some stuff and got called on it. What is the tussle here?

  • 84. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 6:09 am

    @spf15

    Translation: I am a racist piece of garbage, but maybe if I put it like that, the skinny brown bastards clogging up the interwebs will be too stupid to notice.

    “gc said something mean about some elite Indians! He’s racist! Using the word ‘racist’ means I win, right?”

    XYZ made some good points, gc tried to counter with some stuff and got called on it. What is the tussle here?

    Concern troll is very concerned.

  • 85. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 6:19 am

    (continued)

    So all XYZ really did was point this out. Quite correctly so. He also said that Americans have a simplistic view of these things. Quite correct again. I don’t see how this can be otherwise.

    “I’m as dumb and vain as XYZ. That proves XYZ is smart!”

  • 86. spf15  |  August 14th, 2012 at 7:21 am

    gc said something mean about some elite Indians! He’s racist! Using the word ‘racist’ means I win, right?”

    I see that the panties remain twisted and the reading comprehension remains predictably low.

    Concern troll is very concerned.

    As long as there be internet fools, there be concern trolls. It’s all about the balance, my angsty little friend.

    “I’m as dumb and vain as XYZ. That proves XYZ is smart!”

    “Age: 17. Sex: Too expensive at $200/hr. Language: One, sort of. Desire to rule the internet: bordering on the desperate.”

    What a pathetic tosser.

  • 87. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 8:27 am

    angsty

    You don’t know what that word means.

    “Age: 17. Sex: Too expensive at $200/hr. Language: One, sort of. Desire to rule the internet: bordering on the desperate.”

    What a pathetic tosser.

    Take a guy using unctuous David Brooks speak – “Gary is an entertaining writer [and now I'll proceed to attack him]…”, “…quite correct…” – call him dumb, and watch the dork flame war cliches come out. Rarely fails!

    (Ooh, I’m a teenager, sexual undesirable, and wear panties! Yeah, I’m psychologically scarred forever. And the underlying misogyny/homophobia of the panties remarks is noted.)

  • 88. spf15  |  August 14th, 2012 at 10:11 am

    means.

    You don’t know what that word means.

    Nice game.

    Take a guy using unctuous David Brooks speak – “Gary is an entertaining writer [and now I'll proceed to attack him]…”, “…quite correct…” – call him dumb, and watch the dork flame war cliches come out. Rarely fails!

    Take a yob who would put Arundhati Roy to shame with the shrill histrionics, and watch more of the same. Rarely fails!

    (Ooh, I’m a teenager, sexual undesirable, and wear panties! Yeah, I’m psychologically scarred forever. And the underlying misogyny/homophobia of the panties remarks is noted.)

    When charged with racism, backpedal furiously and then accuse the accuser of misogyny and homophobia. Rarely succeeds, but worth a try!

    Here, I’ll make it easier for you. Yes, I would definitely qualify as a chauvinist, but at least I have the introspection and the balls to admit it.

    And only a dim fool like you would equate what I wrote to homophobia. Par for the course. Honesty was never your strong suit growing up, was it?

    What a clown.

  • 89. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    Yes, I would definitely qualify as a chauvinist, but at least I have the introspection and the balls to admit it.

    Whoah, man. You know you’re doing wrong, but you admit it. You’re, like, authentic and shit!

    Like Heidegger!

    Or Heydrich!

    Or one of the bad guys from Buffy the Vampire Slayer!

    “I’m doing evil and I know it, but I do it anyway. But I don’t lie about it! Be proud of me!”

    When charged with racism, backpedal furiously!

    This is obviously flame war bullshit, but what’s even more pathetic is that you’re fucking it up.

    The “backpeddling” part was fine – default for stupid and/or unscrupulous people talking to somebody who uses any degree of nuance.

    But you’ve already gone and preemptively ruin with the whole “When charged with racism” bit.

    You seem to be trying to get something out of my “Not all Indians in general” line. (“He went out of his way to specify that he’s not talking about all Indians! Racist!”)

    But I wrote that before you called me a racist.

  • 90. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Also:

    In your mention of Arundhati Roy, you unwittingly make it obvious that you got your opinion on her from John Dolan’s old Exile article, which makes your presuming to condescend to Brecher particularly rich.

  • 91. spf15  |  August 14th, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Whoah, man. You know you’re doing wrong, but you admit it. You’re, like, authentic and shit!

    Like Heidegger!

    Or Heydrich!

    Or one of the bad guys from Buffy the Vampire Slayer!

    “I’m doing evil and I know it, but I do it anyway. But I don’t lie about it! Be proud of me!”

    You got it, man! Way to go; there’s a first.

    Here’s a little hint; free of charge. When you try sarcasm, it simply comes across as retarded. Also not your strong suit. Pick a different shtick.

    pathetic whining and yammering snipped…

    Spineless worm.

    In your mention of Arundhati Roy, you unwittingly make it obvious that you got your opinion on her from John Dolan’s old Exile article, which makes your presuming to condescend to Brecher particularly rich.

    Can somebody explain to this particularly slow lipsum-bot that I am an Indian dude and I don’t need a “John Dolan’s old Exile article” (whatever the fuck that might have been) to form an opinion of Arundhati Roy?

    I don’t have the time or patience to school this idiot.

  • 92. Rehmat  |  August 14th, 2012 at 2:59 pm

    Carpenter – did you know that though Gandhi was against the establishment of Jewish homeland in Palestine – According to Gandhi’s Jewish biographer, Joseph Lelyveld, Gandhi had a Jewish gay boyfriend. Though the author ignore to mention that Gandhi’s 17-year-old personal secretary in South Africa, Sonja Schlesin (1888-1956) was also Jewish.

    http://rehmat1.com/2011/03/29/gandhi%E2%80%99s-secret-love-for-jews/

  • 93. Ozinator  |  August 14th, 2012 at 3:15 pm

    GC said:

    “Using the word ‘racist’ means I win, right?”

    So are you apologizing to me now, you dirty racist? har har

  • 94. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 3:23 pm

    Can somebody explain to this particularly slow lipsum-bot that I am an Indian dude and I don’t need a “John Dolan’s old Exile article” (whatever the fuck that might have been) to form an opinion of Arundhati Roy?

    Sure you don’t.

    (“I’m Indian! That means I know about Indian intellectuals!”)

  • 95. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    @93

    So are you apologizing to me now, you dirty racist? har har

    For calling you a racist Jew hater in another comments section? You are a racist Jew hater.

    As if the fact that spf15 is an idiot proved that no accusation of racism is ever valid. We’ve got an instance of genuine racism right here on this page. (Comment number 67.)

  • 96. gc  |  August 14th, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    (continued)

    Comment 63, not 67.

  • 97. joe_bob  |  August 14th, 2012 at 6:37 pm

    Is it just me or are we all glad there was a new-old War Nerd article? Gary, I hope you come back but in the meantime we can geek out here together – I’d rather argue with you jerks on either side of the debate than deal with the jerks I deal with at my tech support job or in traffic trying to get to or get away from said tech support job. I’d totally join the fray if I knew any Indian history. Anybody recommend some authors/books? I enjoy Peter Green for his skepticism and cynicism so anybody like that is especially welcome.

  • 98. joe_bob  |  August 14th, 2012 at 6:43 pm

    Only history on India I’ve read is Tournament of Shadows, which was okay

  • 99. spf15  |  August 14th, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    @93

    Dear Mr. Ozinator,

    Come now! This is most unfair of you. I must take serious exception to you calling our friend gc a racist asshole. This hurts his feelings and he would like you inform you categorically that he may be a slimy bastard for sure, but he is definitely not a racist asshole. Okay, maybe a little, but not a whole lot and never on Sundays. Also, he wishes to tell you that he does not wear panties, though he thinks about it a lot.

    I think an apology is in order.

    Sincerely,
    spf15

  • 100. spf15  |  August 14th, 2012 at 7:58 pm

    @97

    joe_bob,

    A conversation with a moron like gc hardly qualifies as a “debate” (or come to think of it, even a conversation), but let that not detain us.

    I would suggest anything by Ramesh Chandra Majumdar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramesh_Chandra_Majumdar).

    There is a bibliography at the end of that wiki article.

    An American friend has read and has recommended the following book: http://www.amazon.com/India-A-History-John-Keay/dp/0802137970/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1344998971&sr=8-3&keywords=indian+history

    I haven’t read it myself so I cannot comment on it personally, but I trust him enough to relay that recommendation.

  • 101. joe_bob  |  August 14th, 2012 at 8:11 pm

    You fuckers should all apologize unless you can get back to debating the war-nerdy details as opposed to the internet trash talk I can find in any youtube comments section. I was actualy enjoying myself earlier

  • 102. Ozinator  |  August 14th, 2012 at 9:27 pm

    So gc,

    We have proof of your racist comments here but my comments were as innocent as any Jew bringing up the FACT that “Girls” is a show written by and about Jewish girls. In fact Jewish press DID bring up that fact and you said they weren’t racist because they weren’t me.

    You seem ticklish about being called a racist and I want to know more about your feelings regarding more cultures. You’ve covered Indians and Goyim…..what do you think about other others?

  • 103. Ozinator  |  August 14th, 2012 at 9:29 pm

    @99

    ok

    OK gc, I’m sorry that you won’t forgive me for what you said to me.

  • 104. gc  |  August 16th, 2012 at 3:29 am

    @101

    You fuckers should all apologize unless you can get back to debating the war-nerdy details as opposed to the internet trash talk I can find in any youtube comments section.

    You should be so lucky to read a Youtube comments section with as much War Nerdy (and other varieties of) substance as I gave you in some of my comments here, ingrate.

  • 105. CensusLouie  |  August 18th, 2012 at 9:46 pm

    Here’s a little international dispute that would do the nerd proud.

    http://news.yahoo.com/japan-nationalists-land-isle-heart-row-china-012057812.html

    Japanese and Chinese nationalists duel over worthless rock islands by taking turns swimming past the coast guard to planet little flags on them. It’s 21st century “warfare” at its finest!

  • 106. patb  |  August 19th, 2012 at 2:40 pm

    http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE3-6/sandhu.html

    o quote Lt. Gen. V. R. Raghavan about his remarks regarding 1 Sikh’s efforts after landing at Srinagar [8]: “The battalion with approximately 500 troops had gained by its fast moves and self reliant actions, two days’ time against a much larger force of 5000. This was enough to bring in more troops into Srinagar and the capital was thus saved from falling into enemy hands. The history of Jammu and Kashmir would have been different without this one infantry battalion being able to change it decisively.”

    This battalion suffered 494 men lost in Kashmir.

  • 107. Vendetta  |  August 20th, 2012 at 12:05 am

    gc, are you really unaware of how the phrase “panties in a twist/wad/knot/bundle/bind/bunch/fucking whatever” is used? Or just particularly insecure?

    I’m having a little laugh at the Indian guy having a better grasp of your language than you.

  • 108. Sikh  |  August 22nd, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    @Sanjay
    Maybe you should read Indian History again, when Muslim’s rulers were fucking and taking away your mothers and sisters, it was Sikh’s has guts to bring them back.
    This history reality will put back your head on shoulders.

  • 109. Alan  |  August 23rd, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    Hi, cards on the table born again atheist, with no delusions of empire, generations of family who didn’t give a monkeys about the empire and were happy staying on the farm drinking rough cider and probably reproducing without due care and attention, only have to look back at my own grandmother for proof of that.
    Having had the luxury of a working mind I have seen the world and it’s not black and white guys there’s a billion shades of grey unless of course you live in a fundamentally reductionist mind set, very rarely there is right or wrong without extenuating circumstances, did I mention slight liberal leanings? I have met Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Satanist and the occasional Christian I would be happy to call brother or sister, or even darling if the mood took me, I draw the line at Scientology and their ilk, I prefer a dirty brain to a washed one.
    What saddens me is that one of the truly great religions if you look at the quality of their followers is the Sikh religion it is an absolute duty to protect the weak, admittedly whilst in the environs of the Golden temple I saw a petty thief beaten with Bamboo staves by the priests all of 2 foot away from me, with the excuse that they knew it was him and he had done it before obviously deterrence wasn’t working there that well.
    I have also visited Gudwarha temples they provide food and shelter to any who ask as do many Muslim places of worship who in India also provide free schools and hospitals, can see would want to bomb them given the rough ride free health care has received in the US. The point is not religion it is what you do with it. To my mind it is not sitting back and letting the world be shit on it is if you are willing to consider taking in that orphan regardless of background and protect them like your own.
    You have to make a stand against unthinking bigotry when have the Sikhs ever planned an outrage in the US? They won’t they have a code of honour. In defence of the Sikh community, as if they needed it, not only do they do more on a practical level than most of the Christian community, but any race that can drink export strength Newcastle Brown is a force to be reckoned with.

  • 110. TheExilee  |  August 30th, 2012 at 6:40 am

    Hey Mark Ames and John Dolan, how much do we have to pay you guys to get Brecher’s tubby butterfingers hammering away on the keyboard again? The reposts are getting beyond a joke! Just put up a donate button to bring Brecher back, and we’ll sort it I’m sure.

  • 111. Sly Coorder  |  October 3rd, 2012 at 11:06 pm

    A retired Golden Temple high military officer was recently assaulted by four men with long beards, “unofficially” suspected of being Sikh.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/01/attempted-murder-indian-military-officer

    Reminded me of this War Nerd classic.

  • 112. H Singh  |  January 11th, 2013 at 3:43 pm

    Check out the history of Banda Singh Bahadur and Baaj Singh as well some of my favorite’s in the endless list of Sikh badass’s. When the Moguls caught him(Banda) they cut his son into pieces and fed it to him -To piss off the moguls that much he really had them cornerd for a bit.
    Also I must mention that during the initial militarization of the Sikhs, these warrior were basically peasants, young men with backbones who said to hell with the old lame traditions of the land, I’am gonna get me a Mogul head. Untrained, farm tools converted to weapons, no food, no resources -just lots of Grit..

  • 113. Asikh  |  January 12th, 2013 at 6:19 pm

    @sanjay

    almost everything you wrote is factually incorrect. sikhs are not hindus as they are not muslims. anyone interested in understanding the happenings of 1980s in punjab should do a google search and please read all accounts and then intelligently construct the truth from it.

    some also wrote about Guru Nanak studing Islam and following islamic monotheism. Guru Nanak did not formally study islam. he would have known it from muslims who were a good part of the population where Nanak lived. islamic monotheism is an extension of the semitic monotheism albeit with some differences. sikhism rejects the monotheistic beliefs as present in the semitic religions. the idea of a god in heaven, a satan in hell, angels, demons, judgement day etc. are rejected in sikhism. Sikh monotheism believes in one source – called waheguru, or the wonderous/awesome lights that dispels the darkeness of ignorance. all of the universe including all humanity on our planet, according to sikhism, has the same source and this is why sikhism promotes human equality. this is also the reason why sikhism does not believe in forcibly converting people like many other religions do.

  • 114. Me Too  |  March 6th, 2013 at 10:40 am

    What a load of horseshit. You need to learn how to research history and not rely so much on propaganda written on Sikh separatist websites. Pretty much every assertion of ‘fact’ you made about historical events and personalities is wrong.

  • 115. S Kooner  |  March 13th, 2013 at 5:57 pm

    Sad to see how much of the debates have gone off track, however this was a fascinating article.

    Bertrand Russell (Philosopher, Mathematician 1872-1970)

    If some lucky men survive the onslaught of the third world war of atomic and hydrogen bombs, then the Sikh religion will be the only means of guiding them. When asked, isn’t this religion capable of guiding mankind before the third world war? He said, ‘Yes it has the capability, but the Sikhs haven’t brought out in the broad daylight the splendid doctrines of this religion, which has come into existence for the benefit of the entire mankind. This is their greatest sin and the Sikhs cannot be freed of it.’

  • 116. S Kooner  |  March 13th, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    Mr M Gandhi…was the Indian version of Hitler! He infact wrote a few letters to him in awe, he also had a gay relationship with a german bodybuilder..he used to test his spirituality by sleeping naked with his nieces…some mornings he would wake up disaapointed as he would fail to keep his sexual urges in control…now this is the father of India…load of bollox if you ask me. Sikhism was created because it denounced certain practices of Islam and Hindhuism, Brahmins who were the elite of the caste groups were the only people who had access to their religious scriptures, anybody else was forbidden. Guru Nanak preached a message of peace love and harmony, the Sikh Scriptures were hand written by its 10 Gurus and are authentic and to date are proving history right. Just recently reports have been dug out in the vatican that confirm Guru Nanaks visit to the pope and how he denounced the imprisonment of people at the time, Chritian and Chinese missionaries were witnesses to the execution of the 5th Guru, Guru Arjan Dev Ji and British Officers witnessed the excecution of Banda Singh Bahadur by the moghuls, and also the 700 Sikhs that were massacred leading upto his execution, it is noteworthy that not a single person converted to Islam.

  • 117. S Kooner  |  March 13th, 2013 at 6:13 pm

    I am often told by friends you can’t get to god unless your my religion…”How is your religion different?” I say the Sikh Gurus came here just like other prophets from other faiths to spread the message of the almighty…but in the process ended up getting worshipped themselves. The Sikh Gurus had one objective, to connect human beings to god through rightousness and spirituality. A verse from the Sikh Scriptures translates..Nanak Yearns to become the dust of the feet of the humble servant of the lord”. Guru Nanak says “if you want to play this game of love, come to me with your head in your palm, once you have crushed all ego and worldly desires”

  • 118. hindu from india  |  May 4th, 2013 at 10:53 am

    i am a hindu from india. sikhs are very brave and its completely diffrent from hinduism. they are good people and also very helpful person. in the temples of sikhs, everyday nearly lakhs of indian people eat food of free of cost.these people also save hindu peoples from sadis mughal emporer.india’s prime minister and also army chief is a sikh. they are such a brave hearts. they wear sword because of doing justice. they did many thing for india. population of sikh india is 2.3% but they are also living legends.

  • 119. Guru  |  May 12th, 2013 at 10:51 pm

    This article is nonsense.

    At no point did Alexander the Great ever say that the people of Punjab should all be called Alexander. And anyway, that was nearly 2000 years before any Sikhs were around, so hardly relevant.

    Also the Sikhs would have no more conquered India than the Canadians would have conquered America. And for your information the Zulu tribe of South Africa had thousands of non-Zulu tribe members forcibly assimilated into them. It was British and Dutch presence ironically that meant that people had even heard of them. The same with the Sikhs. If the British had not isolated them so much, everybody would have just assumed they were Hindus.

    This is not take anything away from Sikh people, who are very nice from my experience, but just to highlight that this author talks a fair amount of nonsense.

  • 120. YSVRao  |  June 13th, 2013 at 10:43 am

    The ignorance of this writer is astounding. Apart from the getting the name of Porus wrong (Pontus WTF) , his history of Punjab is completely skewed.
    Punjab until the rise of Sikhs was considered a joke pretty much by every invader be they Indian or foreign.
    There were powerful empires based in Magadha(Bihar),Guptas(UP), Satavahanas(Andhra), Cholas(Tamil Nadu) and Palas(Bengal)
    The Punjabi empire is conspicuous by its absence.
    Greek historians and travellers were never impressed by the martial nature of the Punjabis.That praise they reserved for the people of Magadha.

    I dont know where to begin with the utter nonsensical claim of Hindu inertia.Suffice to say to that Sikhs were Johnnycomelately or rather JaswantSingh come lately to the beating Muslims game. They succeeded only because the tough and wiry Marathas paved the way for them by taking on the then most powerful empire in the world and reducing to Delhi and its environs. It was Marathas who achived it ,not Sikhs.

    As for the contribution of WWI and WWII, yes the Sikhs were loyal chowkidhars(a derisive term for watchmen) for the British. Why exactly is serving in the wars of your oppressor a point of pride. Please explain this to me?

    Now even if Hindus did want to serve ,as they did, the British had categorically declared the bulk of them non martial in a cold political calculation and then deprived them of their weapons and banned their martial habits( literally banned the practice of Kalaripayattu in Kerala).

    The British demartialize Hindus and then taunt them for being non martial
    Then idiots like you ask them why they werent selected for furthering their oppression by serving in WWI and WWII?

    Sailer often said that PC makes you stupid , he is right but what he neglects to mention for fear of offending his loyal readers no doubt is that arrogance, bigotry and ignorance makes you even stupider.

    There is enough evidence in WN writing and message boards to make the case.

  • 121. rajdeep  |  June 26th, 2013 at 3:14 am

    @sanjay:marathas and rajputs are not as brave as sikhs.. they always fought for thier mean .. sikhs fought against islam to save hindus, sikhs turned 71 war on thier head.. the statement was given by pakistani general that we lost the war just because sikhs were there in indian army .your point of saying rajputs and marathas has got no backup ..if ur marathas abd rajputs were so strong why they were not able to stop mughals to invade india . it ws only sikhs who threw them out of punjab.. mughals entered india from rajasthan so called land of your rajputs.. what they did was nothing ..

  • 122. Sikhfan  |  July 15th, 2013 at 1:32 pm

    Great to see this article on the Sikhs. The sikhs have a proud history of valour … but do some more research and get your facts right!! You glorify the 200 sikh “militants” who were holed up in the holiest of Skih temples and were running a terrorist campaign out of there!! really is that best example you of their valour? Most Sikhs consider it to be a black mark on their otherwise spotless history.

    To put it in context for you, its like someone using Osama Bin Laden and his terrorists as an example of great islamic warriors. Islam has had its share of great military men but Osama bin Laden is not one of them!!

  • 123. Parminder Singh Chahal  |  July 16th, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    LOL @ Guru

    Inferiority complex? Take it easy my Hindu friend. When you need me I would be there standing guarding your fragile self from the unjust.

    Thanks for not taking anything away from the Sikhs.. Try getting the government of India to punish the 1984 culprits :) That would be not taking anything away.

    I saw several sikhs burnt alive infront of my own eyes. I would never forget 1984 but fear not my hindu brothern as you probabbly arent one of those but you stink like someone who approves.

    I survived because my dad had more bullets then the number of people who attacked our house. I was 6 years of age and my dad told me to go shoot my mum and sister and then myself if he gets overpowered.

    Go figure how many died at our gates… No one even came to pick up the rotting bodies for almost a week. The police department sent the local priest to ask for permission to take the bodies away.

    Proud of the Lion heart my dad is and he is a Sikh. People still come to see him from far away places just to shake hands with the man who kicked ass those 3 days and saved hundreds of people. He even killed a lot of them with the kirpan to save bullets.

    I do not have hatred in my heart as those who attacked us paid with their lowly lives but I do feel for those who got over powered and were burnt alive. I wish I was old enough to hold a gun and help my dad. I do remember every bullet shot and ever roar that scared the shit out of those who came to kill us. In the end they sent police to over power us but they wouldnt dare enter the street as they knew they wont come back alive.

    Question Sikh gallantry? Come do another 1984 and see what happens this time :)

  • 124. king  |  September 28th, 2013 at 9:02 pm

    Hey sanjay who told u that sikh r nt allowed to marriage with people who r black in color there is no racial discrimination in sikhs but sikh can marry only a sikh color doesn’t matter

  • 125. Vikram Singh  |  October 28th, 2013 at 10:04 pm

    As a Sikh myself, I found this to be an interesting and enjoyable read. Although your way of telling the story is a little different, I am proud of our history and glad that you mentioned it here.

  • 126. YSVRao  |  November 16th, 2013 at 9:08 am

    Rajdeep, Parminder Singh,gc
    Please stop talking nonsense about Sikh bravery and saving Hindus

    Sikhs could only save their immediate environs Punjab and Kashmir, if you think those Hindus should be grateful to you then so be it. Dont expect gratitude from bhaiyyas, Marathas ,South Indians etc who fought and defeated the Muslims long before you came on the scence

    1971 was a success of the Indian army.If a Sikh General implemented then you should also give credit to his Jewish and Parsi seniors
    Please note Jews and Parsis also join the Indian Army out of proportion of their numbers but you dont see them jumping up and down proclaiming their heroism

    Sikh representation in the Indian army is a legacy of British used to maintain order in India – in other words squash other Indians. Rather than hiding your face in shame that you were glorified chowkidhars(watchmen) betraying your own people ,you look upon this “honor” as proof of your “martial heritage”.Not realizing your numbers in the army are a result of British favoritism due to your penchant for treachery more than martial abilities

    And Im sure Hindus of Punjab and Kashmir have gotten over the gratitude for Sikhs during the Khalistani terror campaing in the early 80s.
    Parminder poppe never seems to mention that when he exagerrates Indian atrocities against Sikhs

    @gc
    You are a major idiot.Your knowledge of India is just about zero.Arrogance and ignorace is a terrible combination

  • 127. Talwinder Singh  |  December 13th, 2013 at 9:25 pm

    @YSVRao – Ditto “Arrogance and ignorace is a terrible combination”

  • 128. Awnik  |  December 26th, 2013 at 2:56 am

    Just for your information, the Pakistani army that Bengali muktibahini defeated , was also mostly from the Pakistani part of Punjab. They were from the same race as sikh just follow the different religion. And irregular bengali volunteers defeated them with outdated and some times captured weapons. Off course most of them got training from Indian army, but many of them were trained by ex-bengali officers from British and pakistani army.

  • 129. SP  |  February 6th, 2014 at 12:54 pm

    British used to rule by “divide and rule” using the sikhs and the punjabis selectively to maintain “british” rule over India.

    If the sepoy mutiny of 1857 taught the british anything, it was that it was necessary to de militarize the hindu population and pick smaller minorities who were more loyal to british (sikhs, pathans and punjabi musalmans)to be the appropriate tool of the police and military in India.

    Nothing glorious about THAT !

    Picking on a particular point here…hmmm..

  • 130. SonniSingh  |  February 7th, 2014 at 1:12 pm

    @Sanjay.. Your comment is so full of false truths and obvious envy of Sikh pride.

    Just to add some Sikh history for interested readers:

    Guru Gobind Singh truly lived a glorious life as he had come from a paternal lineage of martyrs who fought and preached the same doctrine (his father Guru Teg Bahadur who laid his head willingly to save the force conversion of a group of Kashmiri Hindu Brahmins, I have sought but could not find another prophet who would sacrifice for another faith such as Teg Bahadur;
    as well as his mother and 4 sons to follow in his footsteps of martyrdom). His life story is an epic one of legends. He is an example of a perfectly conditioned human being, in mind, spirt and body.

    Bandha Bahadur is also worth mentioning. He was paraded in a cage atop an elephant followed by cartloads of decapitated Sikh heads (at the time there was a reward given to any one who brought forth a Sikh head to the Moghul regime, yet Sikhs would still not cut their hair to evade being identified and massacred) before his sons was forcibly fed to him, and before his untimely death being cut limb by limb.

    Baba Deep Singh was another feirce and loyal servant of the Khalsa and is remembered for his unwillingness to allow the desecration of the Golden Temple to take place, interrupting his steadfast meditation to take up arms and vowing to reach the Golden Temple dead or alive. At the age of 75 he gathered an army of approx. 7000 Sikh warriors to battle during which he received a fatal decapitation. However, through his undying spiritual power, he greatly scared the enemies as he held his head in one hand and fought using his Khanda sword with the other hand before finally reaching martyrdom.

    If you read the many stories of Sikh martyrs (www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/martyrs/nojava.html) during this time you will come to see how they had an unflinching reaction to their deathly torments by sitting in meditation in praise of Waheguru (Bhai Dyala Ji being boiled alive in a cauldron without any show of torment or pain, Sahibzadey’s being bricked alive; Bhai Mati Das reciting Jap Ji Sahib while getting cut in half; Bhai Taru Singh staying alive 22 days after getting his scalp removed which was a resort after his hair became iron-hard and was unable to be cut by blade; Bhai Mani Singh who recited Sukhmani Sahib while being cut into pieces; etc. etc.)

    As with many other religious prophets, many miracles were attributed to the Sikh Gurus such as: Guru Nanak’s miracles at Panja Sahib (stopping an enourmous boulder with the palm of his hand which is still there today); Guru Nanak’s miracle at Mecca; Guru Nanak’s miracle at Rameshwaran; Guru Nanak’s miracle with Bhai Lalo and Malik Bhago; Guru Nanak’s miracle at the corn field; miracle of Teg Bahadur’s guruship with Makkan Shah; Guru Angad Dev Ji’s miracle with Tapa, the monk; Guru Amar Das Ji’s revival of Manak Chand; etc. etc. I can go on forever as there are so many more miracles of all Sikh Gurus as well as of common folk like you and me who have a connection with Sikhism (for example, during the 1984 riots a Sikh woman resisted to leave the Guru Granth Sahib at the time Hindu’s were killing Sikhs and instead recited Ardas and was saved by an army of Nihang’s sent by Waheguru ji; or http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/A_Miracle_During_World_War_II; among others) but for the sake of dictating it here I suggest you search Sikh Janam Sakhi’s to get a taste.

    The purpose of my mentioning miracles is to allow some credence to the fact that this was a religion started by the Hukam, or will of God. Occult, yogic or mystical powers come naturally through concentration on “The Naam.” The Sikh Gurus did perform miracles off and on, but they did so out of compassion or to set an erring person right. Teg Bahadur and Arjan Dev Ji were requested to perform miracles to save their lives, but they refused to do so and welcomed death. As Emerson puts it: “Self-sacrifice is the real miracle out of which all the reported miracles flow.” Or as Guru Nanak answered: “I can do nothing against the law of God. It is only He who can perform a miracle. The ‘True Name’ is the miracle of miracles. I know of no other miracles.” The Sikh Gurus never performed miracles to convince others about their faith or to save themselves from penalties.

    So to all these comments devaluing Sikh pride or the martial spirit within us, I say to you that this is a trickle down effect of the ginuwine essence of our Guru’s and the Khalsa that had been created for all of mankind. Sikh’s are a vessel of the gift God had bestowed upon all which is the Guru Granth Sahib in its totality. Famous people who knew of the courage and reighteousness of Sikhs are Winston Churchill, Pearl S. Buck, Max Arthur Macauliffe, etc. As an earlier poster mentioned above, NO SIKHS were known to have converted their faith but rather all had chosen death during the Moghul crusades.

    Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

  • 131. SonniSingh  |  February 10th, 2014 at 11:15 am

    Satgur padsha forgive me for the following mistake:

    “..as Teg Bahadur;
    as well as his mother and 4 sons to follow in his footsteps of martyrdom”

    It is actually Guru Gobind Singh’s mother and 4 sons who were martyred. Correction of relationship: that is Guru Teg Bahadur’s daughter in law and 4 grandsons.

  • 132. jas  |  February 18th, 2014 at 9:05 am

    1)Sikhs are 2% of Indian population, and they make up 75% of Indian army.
    2)Sikhs use the euphemism “Kazaian da ration” (which translates to Ration for the Islamic Preists) for their shit. Whenever they shit, they call it Kazian da Ration.

  • 133. Lionster  |  March 17th, 2014 at 8:42 am

    Sikhs are a brave bunch of people and their histroy is littered with many articles of bravery. They are truely a martial race. Weaponary is part of Sikhism and they have many firsts in the World.

  • 134. Singh  |  March 21st, 2014 at 10:50 pm

    Sikhs have had a long history of showing their bravery in the battle field. But they never fought for winning any territory, they only fought against oppression of the invading forces. Here is a compilation of some big battles fought by Sikh.

    http://www.quora.com/Warfare/Who-have-been-the-greatest-warrior-races-societies-throughout-history/answer/Harjinder-Singh

  • 135. Himmat  |  March 24th, 2014 at 10:25 am

    Sany is a Hindu.They are piece if shit who don’t fight and sikhs protect them from Mughals.The most Fuddu or fucking religion.Only 21 sikhs fought with 10000 afghanis in Afghanistan for Britishers.British appreciated sikhs but the fucking Hindus have changed history of India.Tell me name of 21 Hindus who have will to fight with 10000 people.These are only sikhs who fight for others.It was a battalion led by Ishrar singh and other 20 sikhs but not any Hindu or Christian.Sikhs protect Hindus wives when Muslim kidnapped them in front of their husband and try to fuck them.

  • 136. Himmat  |  March 24th, 2014 at 10:30 am

    You should know that British appreciate Sikhs for fighting for them in world war 1and 2.Hitler once said that I need only sikh regiment to conquer whole world.

  • 137. PunjabiJatt  |  April 7th, 2014 at 8:40 pm

    Checked out the Quora answer by Mr. Singh

    Here are the excerpts from it –

    1. 40 vs Millions The most fierce battlefought in history was the ‘Battle of Chamkaur’ that happened in December, 1705 between forces of Khalsa (Sikh warriors) led by Guru Gobind Singh and the Mughal forces led by Wazir Khan where forty unprepared Khalsa who were hungry and weak after traveling in woods for days were to face an enormous army of ten lakh soldiers. No band of soldiers has ever faced such unfavorable odds, not even the Spartans. This was not narrow a passage to defend, this was a small dilapidated haveli surrounded on all sides by the enemy.

    2. Battle of Muktsar
    In May 1705, another violent battle was fought between the armies of Wazir Khan and Khalsa where 250 soldiers of Khalsa engaged and an enemy of 20,000 strong for the whole day. The enemy no doubt put each one to death, but in the bargain left approximately four thousand dead or wounded in the day long battle. The 40 men who had disavowed their Guru, by affixing their thumbprints, were led by the great female general ‘Mai Bhago’ had brought such damage onto the Mughal force of 10 000 strong, they had no option but to retreat. After the defeat of the enemy at the battle of Muktsar, the Mughals realized the futility of their efforts and became so badly demoralized that they altogether gave up.

    3. Battle of Saragarhi
    The Battle of Saragarhi was fought during the Tirah Campaign on 12 September 1897 between twenty-one Sikhs of the 4th Battalion (then 36th Sikh) of the Sikh Regiment of British India, defending an army post, and 10,000 Afghan and Orakazai tribesmen. The battle occurred in the North West Frontier Province, which formed part of British India.
    The tale was mentioned by UNESCO as being as one of eight great stories of collective bravery in human history, and to this day, every September 12th the people of India celebrate Saragarhi Day.

    Sikhs and World Wars
    Even though Sikhs were 2% of the population of India, out of 42,000 recruits in the Indian National Army under the command of Subhash Chandra Bose, 28,000 soldiers, contributing 67% were Sikhs. India joined Allied forces during World War and became the largest volunteer army with 2.5 million soldiers fighting in Africa, East Asia, Burma and Europe. Out of 2.5 million, 22% of Indian soldiers were Sikhs from Sikh and Punjab regiment most of whom were positioned in Egypt and Italy. Their bravery and valour led them to earn the title of ‘Black Lions’ amongst the Arabs. Indian soldiers won 38 Victoria Cross Gallantry awards out of which 10 were Sikh soldiers.

    Sikhs and present
    Sikh regiment has contributed significantly during the invasions by Pakistan in 1960s and 1970s. Pakistan’s invasion lead to full force wars between Indian and Pakistan. Again Sikh, this time joining hands with Hindus contributed and laid their lives down to protect the borders and freedom of India. Pakistan lost all the wars.

    Contribution of Sikhs towards the Indian Defence Services is the highest with respect to their 2% population size. The total number of senior post occupied in Indian Military is around 25-32% since independence. This community has also won the maximum number of gallantry awards since independence – 5 Param Vir Chakras (PVCs), 40 Maha Vir Chakras (MVCs), 209 Vir Chakras (VrCs).
    Today Sikhs are still 2% of the population of Indian but 20% of Indian Military consists of Sikhs. As a part of Indian Military, Sikhs have constantly been fighting terrorists on the border of Pakistan and India since last India-Pakistan war.

  • 138. I G  |  May 6th, 2014 at 10:24 am

    If it wasn’t for the sikhs the whole of india would be muslim. So all these hindus here disrespecting sikhs let it be known if it wasn’t for us you’d be muslim too. Where were the bengalis and rajputs at the time of the moguls, i’ll tell yo where they where they where wiping mogul shit from the sewers fucking pansies

  • 139. Kabir  |  May 14th, 2014 at 8:59 pm

    @ Sanjay and other haters here.

    When you see Hindus spewing venom against Sikhs on this site (or anywhere else for that matter) you have to understand the psychological reason for the Hindus to do so. Historically, Hindus have been a religion of cowards and opportunists. Their lot was butchered by the Muslims for over a 1000 years. As a matter of fact, Afghan and Paki blood is more Hindu than true Muslim, but of course Muslims will deny this because they look down on Hindus and don’t want any association with them.

    When Sikhs emerged in the 15th century, the Hindus, for the first time, had someone to protect them and the Hindus have held this mentality ever since (Sikhs are our protectors).

    Sikhs died heroically in battles against the Muslims and probably prevented the Muslims from converting the rest of the Hindus to Islam, and this is the main reason the Muslims resent Sikhs. Because Sikhs stopped Muslims from eliminating Hindus, the Muslims hold a historic grudge against the Sikhs. As a matter of fact, Muslims hate anything and everything that prevents them from spreading their religion in this world and they employ all means to ‘spread’ their religion. Since Sikhs fought against them and their tyranny, Sikhs are often harassed and mistreated by some Muslims even now.

    Hindus, having been saved by Sikhs on multiple occasions, actually feel a bit ashamed at their own incompetence and now have waged a campaign to somehow falsify the glory of the Sikhs. It takes someone with balls to admit the embarrasing truth and so Hindus like Sanjay try to portray Sikhs in a bad light and try spreading false propaganda against their former saviors. Since the British departure from India, Hindus have tasted freedom for the very first time in over a 1000 years and now they want to eliminate all ‘weeds’ from their ideal Hindu garden. They want to bring back the India before Islam. This includes the caste system, wife-burning practice of Sati, idol worship, daughter sacrifice and various other traditional Hindu religious practices.

    Since the Sikhs are kinda naive and took the Hindu people’s word on equal rights during India’s partition and decided to side with the Hindus, they are being hammered by the same people they protected for centuries. I suppose it is fair to say that the Hindus are an ungrateful lot.

    That pretty much sums it all up.

  • 140. Manpreet Singh  |  May 28th, 2014 at 1:42 pm

    Dear Friends,
    Do not spread wrong messages about anyone. Follow the religion you like but respect all religions. Sikh’s Religious Book starts with word – ੴ (ek Oankar) means – God is One.

    No matter by which word you call ur Father i.e. Papa / Baba / Babu / Dad / Daddy / Abba – he remains same. Its same with the GOD, call him with any name – He is the same 1. Spread Love not Hate.

    Never argue in the name of GOD. Spend your time for praising his Nature & creatures.


Leave a Comment

(Open to all. Comments can and will be censored at whim and without warning.)

Required

Required, hidden

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed