What's new

Haryana adds more muscle to Indian Army, leaves Punjab behind

bengalis make sh*tty fighters but very good intellectuals(writer, poets, scientist, economist), we want right job for right person....
Thats a very racist thing to say. The reason they were branded as non-martial by Goras was that they put up a good fight against the company and were not as easily enslaved as the rest of us.

Besides in our experience Bengalis make excellent fighter pilots. Our Ace MM ALAM was a Bengali and so was the guy who shot down a couple of Israeli planes in 67.
 
.
Thats a very racist thing to say. The reason they were branded as non-martial by Goras was that they put up a good fight against the company and were not as easily enslaved as the rest of us.

Besides in our experience Bengalis make excellent fighter pilots. Our Ace MM ALAM was a Bengali and so was the guy who shot down a couple of Israeli planes in 67.

I'm pretty sure MM Alam was a Bihari.
 
. .
bengalis make sh*tty fighters but very good intellectuals(writer, poets, scientist, economist), we want right job for right person....

Quite right.

Thats a very racist thing to say. The reason they were branded as non-martial by Goras was that they put up a good fight against the company and were not as easily enslaved as the rest of us.

Besides in our experience Bengalis make excellent fighter pilots. Our Ace MM ALAM was a Bengali and so was the guy who shot down a couple of Israeli planes in 67.

1. Yes, it was a very racist thing.
2. You are referring to the dissolution, in all practical terms, of the old Bengal Army, after the Indian Mutiny. The majority of those soldiers were from Bihar and Audh, not from Bengal proper, although there were Bengalis as well.
3. Your examples give the clues; pilots need motor skills, much more than physical endurance and stamina (that is not meant to say that pilots don't need physical endurance and stamina; they do, but less than motor skills).
 
Last edited:
.
1. Yes, it was a very racist thing, just the kind of comment to expect from the pack.
2. You are referring to the dissolution, in all practical terms, of the old Bengal Army, after the Indian Mutiny. The majority of those soldiers were from Bihar and Audh, not from Bengal proper, although there were Bengalis as well.
3. Your examples give the clues; pilots need motor skills, much more than physical endurance and stamina (that is not meant to say that pilots don't need physical endurance and stamina; they do, but less than motor skills).
I am a bit confused by your statements sir. so you agree that it is racist to brand people martial and otherwise (your point1). But your point 3 gives the impression that you think Bengalis lack the physical endurance or stamina and hence the martial prowess, especially when you say my examples gives the clues.

Your second point is quite interesting, I'll read about that. I always thought this to be the main reason why Bengalis were not termed martial by the British.

Also do you think sir that this out of proportion recruitment of officers and soldiers from Punjab and Haryana has to do any thing with this martial race theory. Or is it just following the long established trends, like what we have in our northern Punjab.
 
.
I am a bit confused by your statements sir. so you agree that it is racist to brand people martial and otherwise (your point1). But your point 3 gives the impression that you think Bengalis lack the physical endurance or stamina and hence the martial prowess, especially when you say my examples gives the clues.

Your second point is quite interesting, I'll read about that. I always thought this to be the main reason why Bengalis were not termed martial by the British.

Also do you think sir that this out of proportion recruitment of officers and soldiers from Punjab and Haryana has to do any thing with this martial race theory. Or is it just following the long established trends, like what we have in our northern Punjab.


Back then, whoever didn't have land in Punjab joined the army. Simple as that.
 
.
I am a bit confused by your statements sir. so you agree that it is racist to brand people martial and otherwise (your point1). But your point 3 gives the impression that you think Bengalis lack the physical endurance or stamina and hence the martial prowess, especially when you say my examples gives the clues.

You are right, blame it on bad wording. Some of us are better than others in physical endurance and stamina; that does not make them less martial. They get fewer opportunities in the military because recruiters select for endurance and stamina; when recruiters select for motor skills, the fallacies become apparent.

Martial qualities are not entirely defined by physical endurance and stamina. Consider the examples of continental Europe. The English have been known to be good soldiers throughout history. But at different periods, other nationalities have had their day. Most recently, it was the Germans. Before that, it was the French. Before them, the Spanish; they were unbeatable at a certain period of time. The Swiss, the Italians (as Romans) and the Greeks have all had their day. So physical endurance and stamina are not the only characteristics that make martial races.

Coming back to my botched wording, I do think that Bengalis lack physical endurance and stamina, compared to others: the Punjabi and the Haryanvi, for instance; that applies to Biharis also, vis a vis the Punjabi or the Haryanvi. The fallacy of physical endurance and stamina constituting martial characteristics was proven by the British in most recent times, when they conquered the Punjab with an Army largely drawn from the Biharis; they also beat the Marathas, and, on occasion, the Afghans. In short, while Bengalis and Biharis lack the physical stamina and endurance to be found in the north, they are not short of martial prowess, merely short of physical endurance and stamina. If these two had been critical, Napoleon would not have won many battles. Nor would the Romans, who had a torrid time against the Gauls before their superior military prowess led to the conquest of Gaul; they had an equally torrid time against the Germans, but never did get the upper hand.

Your second point is quite interesting, I'll read about that. I always thought this to be the main reason why Bengalis were not termed martial by the British.

The business of martial races was an artificial construct to justify recruiting from the loyal Sikhs and in course of time, PMs and RMs, leaving out the mutinous Biharis who had helped the British to conquer most of north India. This became a self-fulfilling prophecy; soldiers recruited from a region tended to encourage youngsters from that region to enrol, and that led to a steady deepening and broadening of the urge to join the military. Over time, there was no tradition of joining the military in parts of India, while there was a robust tradition in other parts. When you have 90% of your soldiers from certain districts, it is tempting to think of those districts as better recruitment areas.

Also do you think sir that this out of proportion recruitment of officers and soldiers from Punjab and Haryana has to do any thing with this martial race theory. Or is it just following the long established trends, like what we have in our northern Punjab.

My response above.

It is interesting that the origins and antecedents of officers in the Indian Army seems to be changing. Besides the traditional officer classes, drawn from the middle classes, there are now the sons of JCOs or simple soldiers, and there are those who select a military career over one in civilian life, those, that is, with options who selected the military life.
 
.
proof of martial race theory ? i think so :D
IMO this is insulting to use that term. British used to call that to anyone who were thick skulled, idiots who could not think for themselve and most likely to be faithful to their masters.
 
.
Quite right. Now get off the forum and do what's right for you; posting here clearly isn't.



1. Yes, it was a very racist thing, just the kind of comment to expect from the pack.
2. You are referring to the dissolution, in all practical terms, of the old Bengal Army, after the Indian Mutiny. The majority of those soldiers were from Bihar and Audh, not from Bengal proper, although there were Bengalis as well.
3. Your examples give the clues; pilots need motor skills, much more than physical endurance and stamina (that is not meant to say that pilots don't need physical endurance and stamina; they do, but less than motor skills).
thanks for your kind words... :)
 
.
You are right, blame it on bad wording. Some of us are better than others in physical endurance and stamina; that does not make them less martial. They get fewer opportunities in the military because recruiters select for endurance and stamina; when recruiters select for motor skills, the fallacies become apparent.

Martial qualities are not entirely defined by physical endurance and stamina. Consider the examples of continental Europe. The English have been known to be good soldiers throughout history. But at different periods, other nationalities have had their day. Most recently, it was the Germans. Before that, it was the French. Before them, the Spanish; they were unbeatable at a certain period of time. The Swiss, the Italians (as Romans) and the Greeks have all had their day. So physical endurance and stamina are not the only characteristics that make martial races.

Coming back to my botched wording, I do think that Bengalis lack physical endurance and stamina, compared to others: the Punjabi and the Haryanvi, for instance; that applies to Biharis also, vis a vis the Punjabi or the Haryanvi. The fallacy of physical endurance and stamina constituting martial characteristics was proven by the British in most recent times, when they conquered the Punjab with an Army largely drawn from the Biharis; they also beat the Marathas, and, on occasion, the Afghans. In short, while Bengalis and Biharis lack the physical stamina and endurance to be found in the north, they are not short of martial prowess, merely short of physical endurance and stamina. If these two had been critical, Napoleon would not have won many battles. Nor would the Romans, who had a torrid time against the Gauls before their superior military prowess led to the conquest of Gaul; they had an equally torrid time against the Germans, but never did get the upper hand.



The business of martial races was an artificial construct to justify recruiting from the loyal Sikhs and in course of time, PMs and RMs, leaving out the mutinous Biharis who had helped the British to conquer most of north India. This became a self-fulfilling prophecy; soldiers recruited from a region tended to encourage youngsters from that region to enrol, and that led to a steady deepening and broadening of the urge to join the military. Over time, there was no tradition of joining the military in parts of India, while there was a robust tradition in other parts. When you have 90% of your soldiers from certain districts, it is tempting to think of those districts as better recruitment areas.



My response above.

It is interesting that the origins and antecedents of officers in the Indian Army seems to be changing. Besides the traditional officer classes, drawn from the middle classes, there are now the sons of JCOs or simple soldiers, and there are those who select a military career over one in civilian life, those, that is, with options who selected the military life.

A similar trend is taking place here, the good education in Army Public School's is allowing sons and daughters of Servicemen to become Officers. Gen Kiani was the son of a Havildar, I believe.

Although there is still a residual presence of aristocratic "military" families continuing to send their sons into the forces, increasingly it is the middle classes from far flung areas of the country joining up.

The recent trend of rural Sindhi and Balochi being represented in both Officers and Jawan, is a good sign for the country.
 
.
Thats a very racist thing to say. The reason they were branded as non-martial by Goras was that they put up a good fight against the company and were not as easily enslaved as the rest of us.

Besides in our experience Bengalis make excellent fighter pilots. Our Ace MM ALAM was a Bengali and so was the guy who shot down a couple of Israeli planes in 67.
its not racist, may be they were good fighter before british came, who knows, I am talking 2017 India.
why do you think not being good fighter(in organized armed forces) is a bad thing?
they do make good guerilla fighter though, muktis and armed fighters against british proves that.
to add to the reason joe described above for their sh*tty fighting capability is the mindset. Bengalis live in a generally gentle surrounding, loved by mother, father and extended family members. A male bengali is much more attached to his family (& mother) than many other places in India.. they will be homesick and literally in tears if they move outside bengal. I have not talked about food yet, they wont survive the sh*tty food served in Indian canteen.
 
Last edited:
.
Martial race theory is utter bullshit.
People join the armed forces for employment and the promise of a pension.
Its just that this profession is more socially acceptable is some parts of the subcontinent while less so in other
 
. . .
This is funny. The only group of Indians that can actually try to go toe to toe with Pakistanis is now being ostracized by Hindus. :lol:

What is this Harvyani bull shit?

Bring some of your wrestlers to Punjab and get shitted on. You guys can't even beat the Punjabis in your own country. :lol:
All Indian wrestlers who have won medels in Olympics are from that state.

Dont Insult them by comparing them with your State.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom