Indian soldiers in Singapore revolt in support of the Turks

[HeadHunter]

LOLwa, seems you are only left with some fantasies.

Or the truth just hurted you so bad

 

[timetravel]

They were given orders to fight the Ottomans yet they didn't because Ottomans are muslims. To you guys Islam is paramount. God forbid a war between India and some muslim state breaks out, how do we know our muslims will not jump ship and attack us?

this will not happen. The rivalry between nations remains. Even tiny Qatar does not want to merge with Saudi Arabia (the bastion of Islam). They love their nationalism.

Why did Bangladesh happen. Why Afghanistan does not like Pakistan or why it does not merge with Pakistan??

So more Muslims in India is no way gonna benefit Pakistan in any way. In-fact if India has more Muslims the problems for Pakistan will increase manifold. Indian Muslims will prove even more tougher to handle for Pakistan then Afghanistan Muslims or the current Indian regime, when in comes to nationalism.

Even if India become completely Muslim in next 100 years, do not think they will give away Kashmir to Pakistan. Infact they will be even more vocal then what India is currently to get back Pakistan side of Kashmir. Also the few Kashmiri's who might think to join Pakistan now coz of religious affinity will also shift their loyalty to India. Ultimately today or tomorrow Pakistan will have to agree that Kashmir is India's territory.

So whether India is Hindu majority or Muslim majority, the nation India will remain. But a Muslim majority India would be 10 times more problem for Pakistan then the current India. Indian nationalism will always remain.

also do you think Indian Muslims are stupid, that they will allow Pakistani Muslims to rule them over? Infact as India is 7 times bigger, it the Indian Muslims would want to rule over Pakistani Muslims in future. Therefore do not think it is so simple, that the Indian Muslims will give in to the Pakistani Muslims desire to break India.

Everyone knows what Pakistani Muslims did to BD Muslims. Don't think Indian Muslims are naive to let Pakistani Muslims win the war against India, and then Pak Muslims rule them. Rather they would want to win the war and rule Pakistan. What you think as Pakistan nationalism is just Punjabi Muslims. Why would Hyderabadi/UP/Bengali/Punjabi Muslims of India want to be governed by Punjabi Muslims of Pakistan? Now you see it makes no sense.

So if there is a war, don't think Indian Muslims will support any other nation other then India, because India is their nation. So in any war with any Muslim/Non Muslim nation the Indian Muslims will only support India because by supporting India they will only support themselves.

 

[INDIC]

Or the truth just hurted you so bad

Akalmand, how do you know I am hurt.

Read the article again. It was mostly Punjabi musalmans(Potoharis mostly), who refused to fight the Turkish army. There was no "Indian" involved lol.

And Bhaiiyya people helped EIC invade sub-continent, and got famines and genocide in return. They were your masters.

Yes, because British never forgot how the people from Gangetic plains badly screwed the British during 1857 rebellion and I am quite fine happy with it that they never trusted us. You can brag all day for serving the Gora Angrez masters, I don't care.

Moreover, famine took place in Bengal. As for North-West, its nothing more than a British outpost to fight Great Game against Soviets and meant nothing for British apart from the military outpost.

 

[Dash]

There is a reason why Ziad Hamid keeps calling Indian Army as Hindu Army

 

[xenon54 out]

British historians can debate Churchill all they like. Unlike Turkish ones who are banned by law from criticising holy Attaturk or claiming there was an Armenian genocide.

The so called Armenian genocide has nothing to do with Atatürk, Atatürk was a soldier at that time fighting at the front in Gallipoli, not to mention that Armenians were revolting and massacring Turkish and Kurdish population in south east Turkey with Russian help, you are trying to make us look guilty while we were just defending ourselves, we already offered to open our archives and asked Armenians to do the same so historians can decide if the incident was a genocide or not but Armenians refused, seems to me like like they have something to hide, and then you cry when we dont accept your allegations, keep your biased History to yourselves pls.

 

[Gandhara]

this article showed me in simple words: good indians helped us.. be thankfull.. than you came with your hate and it turned to:

good muslim indians helped us wich ended in founding pakistan many of them are left in india.. bad non muslim indians would never support us..

so in the end I have now wishes that muslim indians should get a own country because of the bad indians who are seperating them.. what have you done?

only country muslims will get if they desire is pakistan, patience is very thin now any muslim asking for any division in India will be shipped to pakistan and if turkey desires to host any of your muslim brethens, India will surely give them one way ticket to your land. I hope you will host few millions of them good poeple?

 

[RAMPAGE]

If Turkey entered a war today, would Indians join us on our side?

What do you think?

 

[Trev]

The brits recruited mostly from what is today Pakistan... soldiers from KPK,Punjab,Sindh and Rajhistan (northern india) were their recruiting grounds...

Those Pashtuns regiments today form the Frontier Force Regiment of Pak Army... Most of the Punjabi regiments became Punjab Regiment and so on...

LOL, as a Punjabi myself I can tell you with all honesty that our soldiers were treated like shit. They weren't picked for there "martial prowess" or whatever but for there obedience. The only South Asian soldiers treated well we're Gurkhas because Nepal had an alliance with the British. Stop deluding yourself that the British picked you because you are "strong" and "martial".

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

LOL, as a Punjabi myself I can tell you with all honesty that our soldiers were treated like shit. They weren't picked for there "martial prowess" or whatever but for there obedience. The only South Asian soldiers treated well we're Gurkhas because Nepal had an alliance with the British. Stop deluding yourself that the British picked you because you are "strong" and "martial".

Im a Baluch... we were never colonised by the British.. the Baluch conf states (which had their own militias or armies) had an agreement with the british... (but still many baluch tribes kept attacking the british)... only a few Baluch joined ... not in notable numbers (its weird tht the british still named several of their regiments as baluch regiment... which had very few baluch)...

As for the gurkhas.. not really... they were used employed as mercenaries... just like the arabs amir n sultans had Baluch mercs as their personal body guards etc... (35% of Omans population today in Baluch.... their armed forces comprise mostly of former PA soldiers n Pak Baluch (with Omani citizenship).. heck even their COAS is a Baluch)... but hardly anything for me to brag about...

 

[Samandri]

Those Pashtuns regiments today form the Frontier Force Regiment of Pak Army... Most of the Punjabi regiments became Punjab Regiment and so on...

Actually frontier force regiment comprised mostly of Punjabi muslaman and Sikhs, on the same pattern like baloch regiment. Pashtuns were mostly mixed in battalions with others. The most famous battalion which was associated with Pashtuns, was 40th Pathans and that was part of Punjab regiment not frontier force regiment. Numerically Pashtuns were insignificant in British Indian army, only 12,000 in first world war , half of them were indian pathans (urdu speaking, multanis etc) and half of them , around 6000 ,were Pashtuns of cis and trans indus.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Actually frontier force regiment comprised mostly of Punjabi muslaman and Sikhs, on the same pattern like baloch regiment. Pashtuns were mostly mixed in battalions with others. The most famous battalion which was associated with Pashtuns, was 40th Pathans and that was part of Punjab regiment not frontier force regiment. Numerically Pashtuns were insignificant in British Indian army, only 12,000 in first world war , half of them were indian pathans (urdu speaking, multanis etc) and half of them , around 6000 ,were Pashtuns of cis and trans indus.

Hard to believe considering KPK,Punjab,Rajhistan were the prime recruiting areas for the british army... apart from the nepali mercs... all in all 1.2 million soldiers from this region were sent to fight in WW1... 2.5 million in WW2... And most of these men joined for financial benefits not the love of the british.. but i would salute them for their heroic actions...they displayed during those wars..

 

[Samandri]

Hard to believe considering KPK,Punjab,Rajhistan were the prime recruiting areas for the british army... apart from the nepali mercs... all in all 1.2 million soldiers from this region were sent to fight in WW1... 2.5 million in WW2.

You thought tens of thousands of Pashtuns were recruiting in British army?. The soldiers were mostly Punjabi musalman , Sikhs and Gurkhas. Pashtuns are mentioned along with them as they were hyped people. The statistics and records, details are available from British sources. The most celebrated and famed fighting unit from Pashtuns, was khyber rifles, and that was irregular unit.I have already mentioned about 40th Pathans which was just a battalion. You can say Pashtuns mostly served in irregular militias and scouts, like kurram militia, khyber rifles, tochi scouts, zhob scouts etc.

Even today some people, including you, think that 40% of Pak army consist of pashtuns, the fact is they are just 14% (It is better ratio than was in the British indian army).

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

You thought tens of thousands of Pashtuns were recruiting in British army?. The soldiers were mostly Punjabi musalman , Sikhs and Gurkhas. Pashtuns are mentioned along with them as they were hyped . The statistics and records, details are available from British sources. The most celebrated and famed fighting unit from Pashtuns, was khyber rifles, and that was irregular unit.

Even today some people, including you, think that 40% of Pak army consist of pashtuns, the fact is they are just 14% (It is better ratio than was in the British indian army).

That 14% ratio is from Military Inc nonsense by army hating Ayesha Siddiqa and lame stats she claimed she got in 2000s....and herself claims tht the recruitments were made in KPK and Baluchistan... heck the the lane where i live is occupied by mostly Yousafzai officers... we are the only non Pashtuns people in our neighbourhood...

I can give you a personal ex... my fathers parent regiment itself has 40% Pashtuns... 10% Sindhis n Baluchistan and rest are Kashmiris n Punjabis... or the Fact that despite the lames stats you pulled there have been several Pashtun COAS....

It has been us Baluch who have been the least interested in joining the armed forces due to our lazy and unruly nature (which itself is changing.... over 20k Baluch have joined in the last 3-4 years alone...

And now the campaign to recruit soldiers from FATA...

 

[FaujHistorian]

View attachment 143978


One of the lesser known supportive aspects of the Indian Muslim support was their rebellion and their demonstrations against the British army
World Bulletin/News Desk

The Indian Muslims, whether be in World War One, or during the War of Independence, displayed both material and moral support to the Ottoman, Anatolian and Muslim brotherhood- although throughout history this has been remembered little, quickly forgotten and lost in oblivion and has remained in the shadows like other subjects. With the intervention of the “Indian Caliphate Committee”, they encompassed a wide range of support - initially through organised weapon-ammunition acquisition as well as medical, food and clothing, but also extended to substantial financial aid, lobby movements, military and civil disobedient action. Behind this support however was the words of an Indian Muslim: “At one time, there were many Muslim governments and kings. When one of these were abolished we never let ourselves slide into sorrow. Turkey was the last of the Islamic governments and the strongest. We fear that we will become stateless like the Jews”. This reflected that the idea of the “Caliphate” and the “Islam” had a focal point of hope.

It can be understood through many examples that the Ottomans even at their lowest point, actively pursued “Islam” and the “Caliphate position” starting from Europe, the Middle East, Africa right to the furthest points of Asia. The impact of this was realised through “a mass fast and mass prayers by India on the 17th October 1919 with general demonstrations throughout the country”. With the aim of destroying the Treaty of Sevres, a peaceful political protest campaign had begun to influence the British government in India. At the end of the movement, many arrests were made including those of “Nehru” and “Ghandi”. Elections, schools and British goods were boycotted. On top of this, the Viceroy of India, Lord Reading, claiming increasing Islamic favouritism, advised London that British nationals in Istanbul to be sent home, the Caliphate has sovereignty of Islamic sacred sites to be recognised and that Thracia and Smyrna be returned to the Ottomans.

One of the lesser known supportive aspects of the Indian Muslim support was their rebellion and their demonstrations against the British army. One of the most serious acts of rebellion resulted on 15th February 1915 in the British Empire colony of Singapore. Made up entirely of Indian Rajput, Mogols and Pashtuns, the 5th Light Infantry Brigade initiated a mutiny – declared by the Ottoman Government as a “Major Jihad” - against the organised British government for independence, with the support of Indian members of the “Ghadar Party” and an active German propaganda movement.

Although the British authorities and the media put forward that the reason of the uprising was the discontent and jealousy of the appointments, the real reason what that the discontent that had begun in Indian and Burma since the Ottoman government entered World War I, it was actually the reluctance to fight against the Muslim Ottoman army and that the actual enemy was thought to be the British and French.

Thus in this situation, in the report given by the Ottoman empire's Batavia Consul General Rifat Efendi said that: “It is that there are various rumours surrounding the rebellion in Singapore however the truth is that an Indian Muslim, in the afore mentioned city and Indian Muslim soldiers have declared major Jihad for the greater Islamic state against the British and also including the Hindu soldiers arriving from Singapore as well those Muslim civilians according to the intelligence that I have received”.

After beginning to kill the British soliders and freeing the German-Austrian prisoners held at the prison camps and taking control of the fort and weapon arsenal, the rebellion by the Indian Muslim soldiers with no strong leadership and as a result of the unorganised and unplanned attack was quickly suppressed by the allied Japanese, Russian and French ships as well as the ground army. Despite this outcome, the possibility of the effect of a “Major Jihad”, “Islam” and “Caliphate” in Singapore caused the British to be apprehensive. With what took place in Singapore possibly sparking further conflict and rebellion, the British administration severely punished the Indian soldiers.

On other hand, while the trials and the executions of those Muslim soldiers in the 5th Light Brigade were being carried out, a propaganda campaign had begun in order to vitiate and cover up the extent of the mutiny. The official statement to the press claimed that those who had petioned to want to fight in Europe were rejected. A portion of the 850 soldiers belonging to the 5th Light Brigade and a portion of the 200 officers and seboys were executed by firing squad and publicly hanged, and some were imprisoned and exiled. The remaining soliders were deployed for service in Cameroon and German East Africa against the Germans. In 1917, the Turkish recognised “Malaysian Armed Forces” were led against a campaign against the Ottomans in Eden.

Another rebellion took place in Kut-al-Amare by the Indian Muslims of the 5th Light Brigade. A year after the mutiny in Singapore, in order to occupy Iraq, the 6th Division, composed of Indian soliders - mostly Muslim Pathans - were led by General Townshend who proceeded to Kut-al-Amare by way of Basra to fight against the Turks. The Muslim Pathans who were reluctant to fight against their Muslim Turkish brethren, gave way to discipline issues causing many to rebel and desert the division. Through reports given by Brigadier Halil Pasa, the soldiers who were invited to the Ottoman army and rebel against the British imperialists, eventually opened fire against the British as a result of their experiences during the battle and thus joined the Ottoman army.

SOURCE: Indian soldiers in Singapore revolt in support of the Ottomans | Historical Events | Worldbulletin News

Strange article.


1. In Singapore, there were no turks fighting Brits. So this revolt if it ever was, simply a storm in the teacup.

2. Turks themselves revolted against Khilafat.


So please keep this religious mumbo jumbo out of military history.


Thanks.

 

[FaujHistorian]

stupid Indians... what did we have to do with one imperial entity fighting other.

Tehrike Khilafat in India was triggered by Congressi Mullahs and supported fully by Gandhi and Nehru etc.

Jinnah opposed this stupid movement.

So now you know a bit more about who were the stupid Indians back in 1910's.