21 Sikhs against 10,000 Afghans ! Battle of Saragarhi Akshay Kumar's Kesari trailer IS OUT

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

those sikhs wasted their lives for an oppressor or illegal occupier i.e British

its not something to be proud off even if you believe in this fairy tale that 21 sikhs soldiers had any chance against 10,000 i.e either 21 Sikhs were superman or 10,000 afghan villagers were sleeping

So let's get this straight here. After nearly 19 years, the american superpower + NATO have not been able to defeat the Afghan Taliban. America currently is probably the most powerful military ever known to mankind. According to indianisms, 21 Sikhs defeated 10,000 Afghans but 150,000 + Sikhs could not defeat 30-50,000 skinny legged, malnourished RSS goons, probably the weakest race of men ever to have existed. If the above is true then Somalia is 10x more powerful and advanced than America+Russia+EU+China+Japan+South Korea combined...............

those sikhs wasted their lives for an oppressor or illegal occupier i.e British

its not something to be proud off even if you believe in this fairy tale that 21 sikhs soldiers had any chance against 10,000 i.e either 21 Sikhs were superman or 10,000 afghan villagers were sleeping

Sure they did. Explains why 150,000+ sikhs were sent to hell by 30,000-50,000 skinny legged, malnourished RSS goons during operation bluestar in 1984......

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Proud of the way they fought and fight till this day. Rest is all history and they were just trying to save their lives from attacking Afghans here.

Btw, why do Pakistanis take pride in foreign invaders like Mughals ?

Sikhs are brave but in this case they were doing slavery rather than bravery. British sat relaxed in their couches while letting Sikhs does all the dirty works for handful of rupees. This include Gurkhas too. British purposely did not sent help when Sikhs were dying for their English master. I dont like Afghans but real brave were those who were fighting against the British empire

Mughal Babar may came from outside but his descendants did not invaded looted and went back. They established their life and roots in India i.e married with local, lived there , died there and brought centralised government , stunning architecture, languages , dresses ,design, music, painting, poetry , cousine etc

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Sikhs are brave but in this case they were doing slavery rather than bravery. British sat relaxed in their couches while letting Sikhs does all the dirty works for handful of rupees. This include Gurkhas too. British purposely did not sent help when Sikhs were dying for their English master. I dont like Afghans but real brave were those who were fighting against the British empire

Mughal Babar may came from outside but his descendants did not invaded looted and went back. They established their life and roots in India i.e married with local, lived there , died there and brought centralised government , stunning architecture, languages , dresses ,design, music, painting, poetry , cousine etc

You seem like a sorted dude. Agree with most of what you said. Even I consider the subsequent Mughals to be Indians.

I don't think people take pride in the facts that the Sikhs did this for the British. At the end of the day, they were protecting their territory in India from invading Afghans. It doesn't really matter whose banner they were fighting under. There is a lot of debate even within India about how much pride one should take in the sacrifices Indian soldiers made while fighting for the British for example in both the world wars (these sacrifices are unfortunately for those poor souls, not much celebrated in India and are completely forgotten in Britain), but in the case of Saragarhi, because of the sheer difference in the numbers between the two sides, the whole argument becomes about bravery and skills of the Sikhs and not the banner they were fighting under.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

So let's get this straight here. After nearly 19 years, the american superpower + NATO have not been able to defeat the Afghan Taliban. America currently is probably the most powerful military ever known to mankind. According to indianisms, 21 Sikhs defeated 10,000 Afghans but 150,000 + Sikhs could not defeat 30-50,000 skinny legged, malnourished RSS goons, probably the weakest race of men ever to have existed. If the above is true then Somalia is 10x more powerful and advanced than America+Russia+EU+China+Japan+South Korea combined............…


Sure they did. Explains why 150,000+ sikhs were sent to hell by 30,000-50,000 skinny legged, malnourished RSS goons during operation bluestar in 1984......

Neither Afghans nor Sikhs are superman or undefeatable . Its just beyond logic that 21 men no matter how strong or well trained would have any chance against 10,000 men no matter how weak... Afghan land have advantage of terrain because of which it was not easy to conquer .. I will say Sikhs are still more respectful toward Pakistan than Afghans

You seem like a sorted dude. Agree with most of what you said. Even I consider the subsequent Mughals to be Indians.

I don't think people take pride in the facts that the Sikhs did this for the British. At the end of the day, they were protecting their territory in India from invading Afghans. It doesn't really matter whose banner they were fighting under. There is a lot of debate even within India about how much pride one should take in the sacrifices Indian soldiers made while fighting for the British for example in both the world wars (these sacrifices are unfortunately for those poor souls, not much celebrated in India and are completely forgotten in Britain), but in the case of Saragarhi, because of the sheer difference in the numbers between the two sides, the whole argument becomes about bravery and skills of the Sikhs and not the banner they were fighting under.

Protecting their territory ? Battle of Saragarhi was fought between British Indian empire and Afghan pashtuns tribesman and location Tirah( currently KPK) where this war was fought was territory and land of Pashtuns tribes so they were defending their land while siksh were fighting for British to expand their empire. You see either Bhagat singh is hero or these Sikh soldiers of British army ..Bhagat singh was fighting against British army while these sikh soldiers were dying for British so two opposite character

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Neither Afghans nor Sikhs are superman or undefeatable . Its just beyond logic that 21 men no matter how strong or well trained would have any chance against 10,000 men no matter how weak... Afghan land have advantage of terrain because of which it was not easy to conquer .. I will say Sikhs are still more respectful toward Pakistan than Afghans


Protecting their territory ? Battle of Saragarhi was fought between British Indian empire and Afghan pashtuns tribesman and location Tirah( currently KPK) where this war was fought was territory and land of Pashtuns tribes so they were defending their land while siksh were fighting for British to expand their empire. You see either Bhagat singh is hero or these Sikh soldiers of British army ..Bhagat singh was fighting against British army while these sikh soldiers were dying for British so two opposite character

I understand the area was KPK, but by this time KPK was a part of British India. The Sikhs were not invading here. They were defending British India which was their home at this time.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

I understand the area was KPK, but by this time KPK was a part of British India. The Sikhs were not invading here. They were defending British India which was their home at this time.

It was home of Pashtun tribes man and illegal occupation by British ..Sikhs were on side of aggressor and someone who occupied subcontinent by forced ..Bhagat singh and others freedom fighters were calling such people as traitors who were on side of occupied forces

 

[B.K.N]

Might of USA, NATO and west has not captured all of Afghanistan even after 19 years but I know dozen spice traders conquered all of Hindustan.

There is a difference trade with India or whatever it was beneficial for British and terrain was easy
On the other hand Afghanistan is a wasteland with no resources and only things which it produces are sucide bombers and hafeem Americans are paying salaries of afghani soldiers and politicians from their own pocket just because they don't want a terrorist producing factory
But it took only 12 American commandos and some local slaves to capture this wasteland

 

[Hamza913]

Btw, why do Pakistanis take pride in foreign invaders like Mughals ?

How were the Mughals "foreign"? Most of the mansabdars were native Muslims from the sub-continent, known as "Shaykhzadas", and any foreigners among them settled into the region, they did not pack up their bags and leave as soon as the Marathas seized control, and our culture is almost entirely identical to theirs too. Similar things can be said for the other Muslim empires of the region.

Although, I haven't really witnessed many Pakistanis taking pride in empires like the Mughals as part of our national history (with the exception of the Ashrafs, who come from them), people tend to just use them to trigger Hindus.

Back to the main topic, I find it silly to label it as Sikhs vs Afghans. Why use a religious term for one and a national/ethnic term for the other? It should be Sikhs vs Muslims, or Punjabis/Jats vs Afghans/Pashtuns.