Archer

Here is LT's response to the Kalia issue.

Learning from Isreal

About Pak treatment of POWs

Learning from Isreal

Entire thread
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sou...ng-isreal.html

__________________
Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

My bow is stretched for its task

MarquezRazor

From the link about Pak treatment of POWs..

God..those are psychopaths!These types should be killed like dogs

digvijay

Ofcourse it is for all your types who donot have the guts to defend the country when needed but would not spare a second too pass disparaging remarks about people whose sacrifice caused your sorry ass to have there religion and freedom.

To willingly ignore what General Thimmayya was ready to do in the first Kashmir war and to make it a laughing matter is quite in line of how succesfull the marxist/dravidian historians of India have succeeded in brainwashing Indian youth.

Your kind makes me sad at the sorry state of the modern Indian. Basically turncoats, will follow where the wind blows. No conviction, no knowledge of history. Just argumentative drones.

Being Funny? We are talking about the specific issue of First Kashmir war and how Thimmayya could have changed the course of Kashmir forever and how Menon and Nehru curtailed him. Are you comprehending this or no?

That is your problem. You are so brainwashed that you cannot even comprehend logic.

Apeshit. Bhooke / Nange cannot fight.

No.

Joker get serious.

So you are confirmed Periyar type. Buddy you are way too lucky that you exist somewhere down south. If these periyar types had existed in the north some where we would have shown them what disrespecting Lord Rama means. And you were just dealing with mild brahmins. If by any chance the brahmin of Ganga Belt existed in TN these periyar hoodlums would have been sunk of the coast of ramweshwaram. So do not push your luck.

Oh so now a marxist is talking about social emancipation!. You remind of some Mochi ass I encountered last year.

Does 2+2=4 really need a proof? If as an Indian you do not know who cholas are stop calling yourself an Indian.

Oh Ok. And are you a Pakistani to make such funny claims? Or perhaps one of the TN should be an independent country types? It is amazing how a system of education in TN can produce such crap.

If you do not even know that Iyers were kicked out of TN did you really live there? Looks like you are lying.
Just because they gave your sorry ass a job in the US Mochi?
Might make you write better english.

-Digvijay

digvijay

I seriously doubt it. A minority may be decent but most of them seem to be recent grads with no notion of history or knowledge.

Rest of your post can be divided into two parts:
a) Your comment about Rana Sanga's defeat which people from Babur onwards (which includes Marxist historians etc) have been repeating on and on and is facutally incorrect. My hope is that you understand what happened in Khanua. The firepower of guns had nothing to do with victory.

I will give you another example (one of many). This one comes from 18/19th century by when the firearm technology had matured quite a bit (compared to Babur's days) and there were infantries organized around gun fire. After Napoleans defeat in Russia bunch of his commanders came to India and one of the more famous ones was General De Boigne who headed artillery and infantry of Mahadaji Sccindia.

Marathas had attacked Jodhpur but the brave Keshariya Rathod cavalry riding there Marwari horses who, disregarding the terrible fire from the artillery of De Boigne, rushed through his lines and pushed with their dash the famous cavalry of Mahadaji, two kos back. Infact Deboigne writes in his memoirs that he had never seen such bravery and he remained surprised why he was not put to sword that day. Rathore cavalry men jumped over his infantry and artillery sabering numerous. De Boigne for some reason was allowed to live.

So this notion that Babur's "gun fire" won the day is utter bonkers. It was the leaving of Silhadi from the field with his vanguard force that tilted the battle.

Have you had a chance to read this yet?

Rana Sanga

b)
i) Your interpetation of Thimmayya's position in the first Kashmir war is incorrect. You have to remember that Pakistani army had made deep inroads into Indian soil and they were flushed out. These flushing out operations with the arrival of snow were deliberately pushed out till the spring of next year. All our tanks everyone was rearing to go and capture Muzaffarabad and correct the LOC. But Menon/Iyengar/Nehru stepped in and rest is history.
ii) Your posts are implying that even if India wants it CANNOT mount a resuce operation to save its captured soldiers. This is just plain wrong.

iii)Lastly the kargil war was fought with one hand of Indian army tied behind itsback. If you seriously think there was no better strategy then that was employed than you have been talking to the wrong people.

-Digvijay

Jay

Sure, thats why you joined IA and is composing this reply from the LoC. Get a life, arm chair warrior.
Again garbage of first order. I or no one here disrespected Gen.Thimmaya. But you are disrespecting the hundreds and thousands of non Kshatriya's who fought for Indian independence and the soldiers and officers still at the LoC. Now, if you do not recognize their contribution and keep on harping at how a Kshatriya could save India from all its problems what could I say? Thank you very much for your insight, India knows to defend itself.
A Bot can make better arguments than you. You keep on harping on others as turn coats while you dont have a clue on what's happening.
No, I was sarcastic. Again, you have no clue on the contributions of non Kshatriya's in IA. You are like a horse with blinders, just repeating what you have been saying for eons, how a Kshatriya could've changed the face of India. Wake up and smell the $hit.
And you are non biased in your arguments? So far all I read from your post is blah blah blah kshatriya can save India blah blah blah.
Mukti Bagini would've force feed you that thing you talk about, just to prove you wrong.
I cant get serious with a clown, can I?
So you are a confirmed pattai namam who believes that "Lordu" Rama had a nuclear weapon and he flew in rockets?
We invite you to show what it really means. I assume South India is still accessible from the North and you have enough Kshatriya's in the north to prove the point, dont you?
Oooh, I'm scared. I'm looking forward to meet the "spicy" brahmins from Ganga belt that you are talking about, as I said, we are always eager to meet your types.
And btw so much for your English, its called as Rameshwaram
What ever, I would love to see your a$$ down south talking about Brahman supremacy.
You are effin hilarious. Chola's are Kshatriya's because they were rulers in the south? What about Pandia's, Pallavas, Kalabra's? You know 2.6 + 2.9 = 5 ?
Sure, I commend the state that gave your education to believe that current day Pakistan also belong to modern India. Go on, join the army and fight like a kshatriya and realize the Akhand Bharat that you are dreaming off.
Thats right, I'm lying. Its you who claimed that millions of Iyers were kicked out of TN by Dravidian parties, yet you didnt give any proof, other than the assurances from "some" of your tamil "iyer" friends. Bravo!
No thevadiya payya, its because India has much more social problems than they have in the US. I guess, I cant make you believe, as you have already closed all your orifices and not letting in the information.
Cool, I learnt 3 new things from you,
1. Khsatriya's are India's protectors while rest of the Indians are not worth.
2. Kshatriya's speak/teach English.
3. Millions of Iyers from TN were persecuted and they ran to Maharastra.

Keep em coming

__________________
A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

Archer

Digvijay, there is BR (the site, run by serious professionals who maintain it out of interest) & the forum. On the forum, discussion of medieval India is verboten. Precisely because of the religious angle- do you think the admins want the trouble of all this- just look at the raised tempers on this thread itself between Indians!
Lastly, if you lurk enough at BR, you will realise that it has more serious posters on Indian defence than any other site on Indian defence issues- historians? Mandeep Bajwa, Ravi Rikhye, Jagan, Sameer Chopra. Journalists? Sandeep Unnithan, Vishnu Som, etc. Service members- several, they dont detail who they are. And domain specialists- aerospace engineers, radar developers, physicists, doctors..folks with dozens of years worth of experience in their respective fields.
Now you got off on the wrong foot because you didnt understand the ethos of the forum- ie medieval history is banned, opinions need to be sourced & backed extensively etc- but dont write it off.
If you want to put your site to a wider audience, try India forum etc for more unrestricted discussion, I am not a member, but everyone seems to mention it viz history, more freewheeling discussion etc on BR & elsewhere. Try it out & tell us how it was.

Digvijay, thanks for the info, but that is one case. I can equally point you to several where firearms used in a disciplined manner decimated cavalry and foot infantry alike in India & abroad. After firearms became common, sword & lance cavalry became an arm of surprise and quick strike, or post battle chase & rout, not the decisive arm as it was earlier. Unless of course, cavalry combined both, ie took to firearms.

You are aware of Airavat Singh, he is a fellow Rajput, right- Please read through his work on firearms and how they changed things.

Security Research Review: Volume 1(3) Was Late Medieval India Ready for a Revolution in Military Affairs III? - Airavat Singh

This is the third part, the others are in SRR as well. He describes the battle of Merta which you refer to, see the effect of the regimental system & firearms!

The Battle of Merta, 1790

While withdrawing from Jaipur, Mahadji Scindia had taken a public pledge that, “If I ever return, I shall reduce Jainagar and Jodhpur to ashes.” After hunting out Ghulam Qadir, Scindia turned to settle accounts with these Rajput states. Jaipur was knocked out at the Battle of Patan and within two months Scindia’s army entered Jodhpur and faced off with the Rathor cavalry gathered at Merta.

De Boigne’s force consisted now of fifty pieces of artillery and twelve battalions of Purbias—6500 bayonets. The Maratha cavalry numbered 30000. Jodhpur had raised a national levy of 26000 horsemen—although only half this number was present at Merta—supported by twenty-five antique guns and 10,000 Naga Sannyasis as infantrymen. From the safety of their desert home the Jodhpur Rajputs had been seeing the deadly effects of the new system of war for several years—now they wisely hired Ismail Baig to collect some wandering Purbia and Ruhela infantry and get something matching De Boigne’s force.

Before this new force could join the advance guard at Merta, De Boigne and the Marathas stormed out of Ajmer and by a relentless night march reached Merta on the 9th of September. The next morning they attacked the surprised Rajputs.

De Boigne’s invincible battalions led the attack—the Maratha cavalry was almost a mile behind them. They attacked at a tangent, targeting the just awakened Naga infantry on the far left with showers of grapeshot and flintlock fire. All the Rajput guns had been placed in the Naga lines and these were now captured by the exultant Purbias, while the naked ash-covered monks broke and ran pell-mell towards the town of Merta . Captain Rohan at the head of three battalions rushed forward to loot the Naga camp.

The Rajputs, after a night of opium drinking, awoke along with the Naga sadhus and watched open-mouthed as the Purbia infantry bore down on their left wing. The supreme commander of the Rajput force was Bakshi Bhimraj Sanghvi—a Jodhpur minister—who considered the battle lost and rode away with 4000 horsemen.

But a race of brave men cannot perish in utter inaction even through the folly of its leaders[xv]. Individual Thakurs and Rawats collected their family contingents and prepared to defend their motherland. One such group saw Captain Rohan’s battalions breaking away from the main Purbia force—profiting from this tactical mistake this Rajput contingent quickly bore down on the doomed battalions and rode them down, cutting up half their number.

The other cavalry contingents pointed their swords at De Boigne’s main force. That Frenchman was aghast at the destruction of Rohan’s battalions and saw a huge, towering wave of horsemen preparing to race towards him. He quickly abandoned his guns and formed his Purbias into a massive square—on each face were a line of Purbias on their knees with bayonets extended; behind them were standing more lines of Purbias firing repeated, murderously accurate rounds from their flintlocks; and De Boigne himself in the center riding from point to point and encouraging his men.

The Rajputs stormed through the line of the guns and sabered the gunners. Several of their comrades began falling from the musketry of the Purbias but quite undaunted these cavaliers enveloped the infantrymen from all sides, looking for an opening to get through and cut them up. But on all sides a wall of iron, with razor-sharp bayonets angling out, held them off while the withering fire of the flintlocks dropped down dozens of their saddles. Then through the noise and the dust these Rajputs turned their horses towards the Maratha cavaliers in the rear.

Scindia’s horsemen had expected De Boigne’s brigade to defeat and scatter the Rajput army while all they had to do was pick off the rag-tag survivors and loot their enemy’s rich camp. Now when they saw the same enemy, unbroken and in compact formation, thundering towards them; these Marathas turned rein and fled to the rear. Another mile in the rear were the few thousand horsemen of Holkar who gathered the scattered Scindia cavalry and faced off with the incoming Rajputs.

By this time the momentum of the Rajputs was gone; their horses had been exhausted and their men were spent from their relentless exertion in the heat and dust. Hence they turned away from a conflict with the Marathas and cantered back to their own lines—on the way back several of their saddles were brought down by De Boigne who had now recovered his guns.

So the Rajput army was defeated—but the Rajput spirit was still unbeaten. A picked body of 3000 horsemen decided to make one last do or die attack on the battalions—these men now put on their saffron robes [[xvi]]. De Boigne lined up his fifty guns and dressed his Purbias in two long rows behind them—in the distance a sea of reddish-orange gathered pace and came rolling towards them. While the ground shook beneath them, De Boigne ordered his gunners to fire—gaping holes appeared in the enemy force but trampling over their comrades, the Rajputs surged across the guns and attacked the infantrymen.

The Purbias opened a withering fire and more of the enemy dropped down without touching their opponents. Even then smaller bodies of horsemen continued their attacks—one group even attacking De Boigne on foot before they were cut up by the Purbia bayonets. And at last the attacks died out of their own steam. The furious Purbias who had been forced to fight, what they had thought to be a won battle, for two hours, now advanced and bayoneted the numerous wounded Rajputs writhing on the ground [[xvii]].

This slaughter was stopped by De Boigne who also accepted the surrender of 2000 other Rajputs who had taken shelter in the town of Merta

In medieval India, cavalry remained powerful, but the greater point I was seeking to make, is that the realities of today, dont permit such laissez faire! A regiment charging a position requires guts, but the decision is made rationally and is coordinated with several units & has a larger objective. Boss, the point is that a rescue mission, unless circumstances are favourable, requires detailed planning & force commitment!

Do you think the 18 grenadiers who were killed lacked in martial valour? Why do you think initial casualties were high? That was because of lack of adequate preparation & circumstances which had units assault fortified positions without sufficient arty support or the element of surprise.


Yes, it is a good effort, kudos. As a critique: The section on Sanga could be made more detailed, when you get time footnote it more extensively, and try to make the language more neutral- that would make it a good reference.

Digvijay, India struggled to hold the invaders back and did so via examples of military skill (srinagar airlift, the defence of Leh) & luck (the raiders delaying their advance to pillage & loot) and tenacity (somnath sharma & other folks stand)..but lets not underestimate the magnitude of the task you are suggesting here. You are talking of an indepth reversal of the lashkar advance all the way across what is today PoK. Now factor in the logistics, state of the InArmy & you will see it is not a cut and dry affair. There was an excellent debate on BR about this- google for Jagan Pillarisettis posts on the topic. He is a historian and backed up his statements with actual testimony. I have all respect possible for Timmy, but I am conservative about post war depictions because once its done, we have the liberty of hindsight & the fog of war lifts & everyone says - we should have done different! Eg Pak ran out of ammo in 1965, it had no APSFDS in 1999, in 1971..but what did warplanners at the time have to consider? ...you get the idea.



India most definitely can, if it puts its back to it. But a local commander, cannot undertake a successful rescue without knowing what he is facing, and with limited resources available to him. That is what I am stating!
If you can point out, with sources, that Kalia was right next to the regiment, and was defended lightly, I'd be glad to change my opinion. But everything till date suggests the opposite.


That hand was tied for a reason. War is politics by another means & the reverse applies as well. As much as the GoI wishes to teach Pak a lesson, it has to consider many other options, including international opinion & pressure, the economic impact & most importantly the effect of escalation & the nuclear issue.

Look at what happened at Kargil? India gets its land back, Pak is thrown into turmoil, and is painted internationally as a destabilizing basket case, India captures Pak soldiers & buries others giving paid to Pak propoganda about mujahideen, and most importantly, India's defence modernisation is kicked off.

The one thing I think Vajpayee made a mistake on, was not to allow the Indian Army to rout the PA & allowed them a face saving retreat. Then again, as RayC has pointed out, that would also have meant more casualties for the Indian side as well. Vajpayee is reported to have stated that he didnt want any more Indian casualties, period. But that retreat allows pubescents on the net and in Pakistan to think they "won" Kargil. Cant have everything, can we.

Dont worry about "teach a lesson"- India is steadily plugging gaps in its operational preparedness. In a decades time you might actually see an Indian PM able to stare down a Pak SRBM/IRBM threat thanks to an Indian ABM system, an IAF able to mount a PGM heavy punitive air campaign, an IA able to mobilize within weeks thanks to Cold Start. We are not there yet, but we will be. It will take time, but the Gandhivaadis are a dying breed in India, there is more appreciation of the need for military strength, and India's defence modernisation is (finally) proceeding apace with its economy growing at a fast clip.

digvijay

Let us look at your intellectual bankruptness Mochi. You asked:

I replied:

And after seing this reply you started ranting why did'nt Kshatriya save the world!

Kashmir was forgotten by you. This shows you have no locus standi on any topic of Indian history you are just a drone behind a keyboard, capable of churning out junk and when cornered jump to a different topic.

Way to go Mochzi.

-Digvijay

digvijay

No. This is the fundamental problem that India and Indians have. For defending your own country *YOU DONOT* pay any heed to the international opinion. You as a country do what is right for you.

Bottomline this is a slave mentality where you have to play to the galleries to please everyone. Do remember that none of these other countries whose opinion is supposedly forcing your hand will come to defend you.

Take the example of America. They do as they think is right for there country. They did not ask a world opinion to give its judgement on America's intetions on how to safeguard itself.

-Digvijay

PS: More replies to your post later.

Archer

Once again you jump to the wrong conclusion! Who said we play to the galleries out of an innate desire to please others- we do so, because we are put under pressure since India crushing Pak is not always in the interests of other nations. There are all sorts of prices to pay, economic, international etc- and the tradeoff has always got to be considered by the establishment when waging war. You tell me, why did India stop the war on the west in 1971, and not repeat a "Bangladesh"?
When India becomes a hyperpower (grin) then you can **** a snook at what others make of your actions, otherwise till then, you have to play a balancing role and make the best of what you have, with what you have.

America, is a hyperpower.

digvijay

I am not arguing that sword is better then a gun. Rana Sanga's loss was due to Babur's treachery when a third of Sanga's army under a traitor just left the field. It had nothing to do with firearms of 16th century.

To reinforce the point 250 years after Khanua, wars between Rathors and Marathas at Lalsot and Medta in 1787 and 1790 respectively, even with the presence of French Officers in Maratha army who knew gun fire well the firearms did not carry the day. It was sheer superiority in numbers which decided victory for Marathas at Medta.

Lalsot: (A partial rajput confederacy was organized by Bijay Singh the Jodhpur king and both Maratha/Rajput cavalries were almost similar in numerical strength). In this battle there were 1300 purbiya infantrymen under DeBoigne and they were drilled troops to fire the grapes as well as adept at artillery.

The Rathores, had taken a vow to not return alive without victory, were under Bhimsing.
At about 11 O’clock, the battle passed from cannonade to fighting at close quarters. Rathore cavalry charged the Maratha left under Appa Khanderao and Rayaji Patil with all furiousness.
A camel courier brought the news to Mahadaji Scindia that four thousand Rathores had fallen on the artillery of Appa Khanderao and pushed back the Nagas and Mughalia Sardars killing hundreds of the troops. Lines were reformed and Marathas began to refire there guns, but the Rathores heeded it not.

In the close fighting Malharrao Pawar, Chimnaji the Diwan of Vitthalrao Rao Raja’s brother’s son, Gazi Khan the brother of the late Murtza Khan received mortal wounds and were killed. Sambhaji Shinde a high Sardar Cavalry were slain. There were nearly a thousand casualties on the Maratha side and their two hundred and fifty horses were carried off. The losses on the Rathore side were about two hundred men killed, about four to five hundred men wounded and one hundred horses captured by the Marathas. It is quite evident from the Maratha losses that the Rathore onslaught was a terrible one. On Maratha side great exertion and bravery was shown by the Telangas, the Turk Sawars, Murtza Khan’s son, De Boigne’s paltan, Bapuji Vitthalrao and Pawars.

Marathas lost at Lalsot and Mahadaji had to beat a hasty retreat.

==============================

Medta: ( Maratha Cavalry close to 30,000 and Rathore cavalry 5000-8000. )

A severe battle was fought at Medta on 10th September 1790 A.D. The battle began in the grey of the morning, with a surprise attack by Col. De Rohan at the head of three of De Boigne’s best battalions, on Rathores. But the surprise was momentary. A body of Rathore cavalry of the famous Chundawat clan, mounted and rapidly forced driving out Rohan’s Battalions and charged down on the Maratha position with terrific fury.

The letter from the camp of Shinde States, “The saffron coloured Rajputs, numbering about four to five thousand, drove their horses upon our fauj. They arrived with full violence of the waves of the sea. On our side the salvo of artillery was (terrific), all at once, like a shower of rain, from the campoo and other division (gol) of the Sardars. The fire fell on the Rajputs, hundreds of them were hurled down from their horses to the ground by the chain-shot, grape shot. But coming to close fighting, they made many heroes of our side drink the draught of death or wounded them.

Thus after facing the fire of artillery and the muskets for a while, the Rathore sawars disregarding the great number that fell while marching, rushed into the compo lines and attacked them with swords for four ghadis. Marching still forward in fury they drove back in confusion the Shinde cavalry two kos behind.

Finally the battle ended because you cannot beat 30,000 with 8000. Marathas were no less capable then rajputs but it was not the guns or artillery that won in 1790. Think of it the other way if Bijay Singh had similar resources and could muster 30,000 rathors believe me Medta would have had the same result as Lalsot in 1787.

BTW I would also like to clarify that modern historians, the JNU crowd and others in similar vain have tried to show that Rajputs lost to turks because they had better horses. This is utter bull.
Rajputs bred Marwari which is an epitome of what a cavalry horse should be. And these arm chair historians conveniently forget that in 1191 Prithivraj Chauhan's cavalry routed the Ghurid cavalry and captured Muhmed Gori and after Mophmed begged for his life the magnanimous chauhan released him.

Most Indians, sadly do not know there history and are just to happy to tow the line of Marxists.

Yes I am aware of Airavat's work and he is indeed a prolific writer.

<....Description of Battle of Medta snipped.......>

No one is arguing against better planning. They key is there has to be a plan to rescue our soldiers from getting mutilated by the Pakistanis. If it means crossing LOC, carpet bombing them, smoking them or whatever it has to be planned.

18 Grenadiers lost because of our top brass. Not taking enemy seriously is a mistake. An ordinary soldier cannot ask for this or that. It is the responsibility of the brass to make sure that our brave soldiers do not become fodder. 2 Raj Rif did succeed because the commanders had realised there faulty planning.

Excellent suggestion and I will get to it.

Nope. Luck factor works for a day or two not weeks/months. Pakistanis were flushed out like rats. Do realise they had made inroads as far as Leh etc and Indian troops fought guerilla warfare with them. Read about Major Khusshal CHand and Thakur Prithvi Chand on how they operated. (BTW this was done in presence of local muslims who turned traitors and joined the Pakistani army!)

MVC Winners


Besides what caught Pakistanis completely offguard was taking of tanks through Zozilla pass by General Thimmayya. Indian army won because of its planning and superior fighting skills. And as I said before the arrival of winter just delayed the flushing out of Pakistanis from Kashmir completely. Winter was spent by Thimmayya carefully planning the fight for Muzaffarabad but our friends Iyengar, Menon and Nehru thwarted them. Also note Srinagar for Pakistanis was a far greater prize because Jinnah wanted to celebrated Id there.
Muzaffarabad was really not very well guarded or defended by Pakistanis.

We just stopped our operations because of the UN fiasco. It had *absolutely nothing* to with Pakistani army. Though in fairness to Nehru it was Mountbatten who forced Nehru's hand but the buck still stops at Nehru (and his advisors) since he was the PM.

No. It was easy. Think of it this way. Entire Kashmir including land beyond LOC and current POK was teeming with Pakistani army. They WERE FLUSHED OUT. The only reason why LOC or POK were not reached is because of the snow. Detailed plans were drawn out for clearing these parts also which had to BE SHELVED becuase of Nehru and company.

Can you post the gist?

No not true. Realise that Indian troops had succeeded in there mission of booting out Pakistani regulars pretty much from all of Kashmir. POK and land beyond LOC was the only thing left. Your argument would be valid if we were still fighting a war in the winter of 1948. We were not instead we were preparing to flush out these rats from POK and beyond LOC.