Jump to content

Ayodhya Verdict

Global.Baba

By Global.Baba
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

Austin 3:!6 Grand Master

Austin 3:!6

Posted
Posted
Padosis on PP forum are in a meltdown 
Not sure why parosis are in such a meltdown though. I was reading comments in social media and to my surprise, most Indian muslims also taking this verdict positively. Most of them are like thank god its over and now lets move on. Good to see this unity for once.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adi B Veteran

adi B

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, FischerTal said:

im not particularly a religious person but never understood how minorities get so bent out of shape if hindus want to build a temple honoring Ram in his birthplace of Ayodhya. 

See the video of Subramaniam swamy on 3 types muslims in the world, one when they are in majority and destroy minorities  ,one when they are minority but know they can arm twist the majority (India) and the last when they are in minority and know they cant armtwsist there way out ,just be silent (China)

Edited by adi B
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gollum Grand Master

Gollum

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Austin 3:!6 said:

 to my surprise, most Indian muslims also taking this verdict positively. Most of them are like thank god its over and now lets move on. Good to see this unity for once.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 

No, absolutely not. Majority are spouting bile at judiciary, govt, Hindus...basically doing what their extremist ideology preaches. Despicable scum of the planet these Islamists (which majority peacefuls are). 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites
javier26 Community Regular

javier26

Posted
Posted (edited)
Just now, FischerTal said:

im not particularly a religious person but never understood how minorities get so bent out of shape if hindus want to build a temple honoring Ram in his birthplace of Ayodhya. 

Please mention the specific community rather than lumping all the other minorities like Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians, Parsis along with them. Your words can be interpreted as if all Minorities have a problem with Hindus in India.

Edited by javier26
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gollum Grand Master

Gollum

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Suhaan said:

They bother too much about us,bhikmangas howcome they get acess to internet

Most of them are based in UK, Canada...plan is simple, have 4 wives, 40 kids and depend on welfare handouts. Same modus operandi everywhere by those good for nothing cockroaches. Freeloading filth. 

 

Image result for muslims welfare allowance"Image result for muslims welfare children"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FischerTal Enthusiast

FischerTal

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, javier26 said:

Please mention the specific community rather than lumping all the other minorities like Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians, Parsis along with them. Your words can be interpreted as if all Minorities have a problem with Hindus in India.

I would say mostly muslims and christians.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rahulrulezz Rookie

rahulrulezz

Posted
Posted
On 11/2/2018 at 1:44 AM, Muloghonto said:

Indeed, there was. By the time after Akbar's conquests, the Rajputs had learnt their lessons more or less. Prior to this, there is very little diplomacy or strategic nous shown by the rulers who opposed them. 

Yes, there is !

Even if you have to fight, fight like a smart guy. 

I will point out a simple example: Caeasar's civil war and his Spanish campaigns. Specifically, the battle of Illerda. 
Caesar showed up with a smaller force, facing up against the best soldiers in the Optimates' army - the Spanish veterans. On their soil. 
Caesar simply made sure that he secured his supply-line into the Spanish beach-head, then shut up shop, erected walls and sat put. 
The Spanish army, despite being FROM Spain, hard marched for a week to get to the battlefield, while Caesar had secured his supply at Ilerda and could afford to wait. Day by day, the position of the Spanish Legions weakened, ultimately resulting in a half-a$$ed battle and quick surrender.


Heck, even one of the greatest generals of ALL-TIME- Hannibal- was effectively neutralized, despite NEVER having lost a battle in Italy, by the Fabian strategy ( which, in a nutshell, is when on home-ground, deny battle, harass the enemy continuously and keep hoarding supplies from your people while burning every shred of supply in the enemy's path, so much so that the enemy ends up leaving due to food shortages in his own army!). 

 

Now contrast that with Rana Sanga. He Marches on babur, who'd been in India less than a year. Almost 1000 kms from his supply base in Kabul. Had not even pacified Punjab, let alone Doab region. Rana Sanga's domains lay less than 200km away and had many allies. 

 

Imagine if Sanga had the BRAINS to march just north of babur, set up shop, throw up some palisades and sit tight. Every day Sanga waits, his position grows stronger and Babur's weaker: he'd just positioned himself between Babur and his supply-lines. There is no way babur is going to win a supply-logistics war from a power in Ajmer when his power-base is Kabul, the fight is near Delhi.  This FORCES Babur to march out and meet Sanga, on a battle-field of Sanga's choosing, in a set-up of Sanga's choosing, with Babur at his weakest position strategically. 
Did he pitch tent to wait out babur's supply ? No.  Instead, he rushed head-long into a fight. 

Babur knew this moron would charge like a proud fool, so he put wagons-chained in the middle of the field flanked by his infantry & musketmen shooting through the wagons, deliberately weakening his center. Rana Sanga, like the tactical moron he was, took the bait and funnelled straight into the middle, ending up getting his army killed.

 

Now take Prithviraj Chauhan - when he beats Ghori in the first battle of Tarain, Ghori does NOT return to Ghor/Afghanistan. Instead, he takes the fortress of Bhatinda, from Phrithviraj's ally and just sits there, strenghtening his supply lines and levying fresh troops ALL THE WAY FROM AFGHANISTAN.  FOR ONE WHOLE YEAR !! 

 

Do you know the distance between Sambhar (Prithviraj's capital) and Bhatinda versus Ghor and Bhatinda ? 

Prithviraj, sitting almost THREE TIMES CLOSER, in his home-base, does jack $hit. Does not even put up a siege. Nothing. Its 'Ostrich time, put your head in the sand and pretend Ghori just loves to vacation in Bhatinda before he returns home, coz we beat him once'. And then die like a fool a year later, because Ghori was smart enough to know this idiot and his army wouldn't fight at night or some nonsense like that. 

 

Need i go on ? 

You can glorify these fools all you wish, but to any student of history, they are nothing more than the worst combination possible in an autocrat: too incompetent to win on the battle-field or via logistics and too proud to bend the knee. Morons like these need to be called out for the morons they are - needlessly throwing away lives to an enemy because they are as smart as a dog with dementia, not glorified. 

That is more or less nonsense. Read your actual books of classical antiquity when it comes to warfare. The Magadh empire was masters of assassination & night-warfare. The Pratiharas were known for their hit-and-run attacks, something they'd picked up from the Arabs. 

Somewhere along the lines, Indian generalship just lost its edge and by the time the muslims arrived, they fought with this stupid concept of 'fair fight' and all that nonsense to feel stupidly proud about.

 

Or maybe its the stories they told their survivors to cover for their massive tactical and strategic incompetence. Because as one reads the Chola-Chalukya wars, it becomes quite clear that these hindu emperors were quite okay with genociding a city here or a region there, just to draw out the enemy and force a fight on (their) favorable terms. 

 

 

The point of war, is to win. Honor or ethics go out of the window when it comes to COMBATANTS, until the formation of the UN. If you are going to risk the lives of your people in war, the only thing that matters, is winning, period. Even today, when fighting gets grisly, the UN convention is tossed aside for combatants and everyone looks the other way ( Iraq-Iran war & their chemical attack on the troops for eg). 

 

Making excuses like 'they fought at night' - so what ? They fought at night because they knew their enemies were stupid enough to not fight at night. 10/10 to them for doing what it takes to win and 0/10 for the idiots who thought they'd rather be honorable dead fools than win a bloody fight ! 

Why should i fight anyone 'fair and square' ? this is not a kindergarten fight over candy, this is fighting over survival of thousands of people, a culture, a life-style, etc. Or to dominate one. I will take every advantage i get, thank you very much, because that's what EVERY SINGLE GREAT GENERAL IN HISTORY HAS EVER DONE. And that is why they are great generals. And that is why the only Indian generals who make the list - such as Krishna II of the Rashtrakutas for eg, did not fight fair and square but did what it takes to ANNIHILATE his adversaries. 
Heck, if i found out that your army has a designated cooking & crapping time in the evening, i will make sure my troops are well fed and took a crap before that time and hit your guys while they are defecating !! 

 

Oh my. How could I miss this gem of a post. Your assessment of Battle of Khanwa and both Battle of Tarrains is just amazing! Deserves a separate thread. 

 

I swear Battl eof Khanwa is the most underrated battle in Indian history. There is no mention of it in folklores, books, schools or Indians in general. People know more about 3 battles of Panipat than Khanwa which I believe was a decisive moment in Indian history. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...