Indian Sikhs begging to be 'Persian'

[Friends of Baloch]

My comrade forwarded me this.

Cringe.

Why do Punjabs always do this? Even 'Sicks' want to be 'Persian', lmao.





lool

[Kakar-Wardak]

Lol clueless any look at a sikh will tell you they are no persians.

[mungojerry]

My comrade forwarded me this.

Cringe.

Why do Punjabs always do this? Even 'Sicks' want to be 'Persian', lmao.





lool

i am guess this man paul s gill is idiot very same like you are idiot.

[Charsi Malang]

It seems to be a Desi trait. Ninety percent I have met will tell you their ancestry is something else yet they will ooze desiness from every pore in their being. I'm not saying it's a bad thing being Desi, but it becomes a tad irritating when almost every single one will try and tell you the same thing when the facts just don't add up. I respect those Desis immensely who will tell you the truth and just be proud of what they are.

I am also sick to death (excuse the pun) of Sikhs claiming they have "beaten" or "conquered" Afghanistan. It seems to be a rhetoric they never tire of repeating. Yes they won a battle or two against Afghans, yes they held Peshawar and a few surrounding areas for a while- commendable achievement considering the adversary they were facing.

Peshawar- in those days a small city not easily defended but easily invaded was held with the utmost difficulty....the Sikhs faced constant rebellion and were murdered regularly. The surrounding countryside mostly non Pashtun areas were also held with difficulty. Yet they will boast that they "tamed the turbulent" tribes and conquered Afghanistan. Sikh sway stopped at the first shadow of the the tribal foothills.

If you compare Afghan conquests of Punjab and battles Afghans have won against Sikhs, you will find that the balance tips in favour of Afghans.

It is a grisly topic, for their massacres have gone down in their religious history. I am talking of the two holocausts they faced which in the first saw HALF of their population wiped out. Wazir Akbar Khan faced the infamous or even famous Hari Singh and there are some accounts saying he personally slew the Sikh general, although this may not be accurate. However he did die fighting Afghans.

The last and perhaps the most famous one is the desified version of 300. Yes I'm talking about Saragarhi... (even that name is written wrong) In the local tongue it is pronounced "sra orray". Many many people are highly sceptical of the numbers quoted in that encounter. The Sikhs indeed were brave and died to a man. Was it out of desperation? Who knows. They must have known what would have happened to them had they have been caught.


For those who don't know. Sikhs did not "conquer" Afghanistan. They managed to take Peshawar city and a few surrounding areas. Peshawar was the winter capital of the Durrani kings. One city along with a few adjoining areas falling does not mean a nation or a country has been conquered.

Interesting argument.... Sikhs have Persian ancestry and that's why they were able to beat the Afghans. Y'a khudaya...lol.

[Elite Pakhtun]

The very first post I ever made on this website was about Sikhs claiming to be Persian. I used to have friends that were of sikh origin, they pretended to be liberal etc, and of course that's when I learned more about them, including they believe that they are "actually" persian.

http://www.pashtunforums.com/pashtun-history-/50252-peshawar-punjabi-hindko-3.html

Check it... so for those skeptical of OP's claims, go check it... first post I ever made here.

[mungojerry]

It seems to be a Desi trait. Ninety percent I have met will tell you their ancestry is something else yet they will ooze desiness from every pore in their being. I'm not saying it's a bad thing being Desi, but it becomes a tad irritating when almost every single one will try and tell you the same thing when the facts just don't add up. I respect those Desis immensely who will tell you the truth and just be proud of what they are.

I am also sick to death (excuse the pun) of Sikhs claiming they have "beaten" or "conquered" Afghanistan. It seems to be a rhetoric they never tire of repeating. Yes they won a battle or two against Afghans, yes they held Peshawar and a few surrounding areas for a while- commendable achievement considering the adversary they were facing.

Peshawar- in those days a small city not easily defended but easily invaded was held with the utmost difficulty....the Sikhs faced constant rebellion and were murdered regularly. The surrounding countryside mostly non Pashtun areas were also held with difficulty. Yet they will boast that they "tamed the turbulent" tribes and conquered Afghanistan. Sikh sway stopped at the first shadow of the the tribal foothills.

If you compare Afghan conquests of Punjab and battles Afghans have won against Sikhs, you will find that the balance tips in favour of Afghans.

It is a grisly topic, for their massacres have gone down in their religious history. I am talking of the two holocausts they faced which in the first saw HALF of their population wiped out. Wazir Akbar Khan faced the infamous or even famous Hari Singh and there are some accounts saying he personally slew the Sikh general, although this may not be accurate. However he did die fighting Afghans.

The last and perhaps the most famous one is the desified version of 300. Yes I'm talking about Saragarhi... (even that name is written wrong) In the local tongue it is pronounced "sra orray". Many many people are highly sceptical of the numbers quoted in that encounter. The Sikhs indeed were brave and died to a man. Was it out of desperation? Who knows. They must have known what would have happened to them had they have been caught.


For those who don't know. Sikhs did not "conquer" Afghanistan. They managed to take Peshawar city and a few surrounding areas. Peshawar was the winter capital of the Durrani kings. One city along with a few adjoining areas falling does not mean a nation or a country has been conquered.

Interesting argument.... Sikhs have Persian ancestry and that's why they were able to beat the Afghans. Y'a khudaya...lol.

sore looser pashtunes haha.

[Charsi Malang]

sore looser pashtunes haha.

Hahaha. You think I'm even going to entertain the content of your response? You actually think you can even communicate with me? You actually think you are good enough for me to write you a proper post back?

Hahahahaha. Learn to read and write first my friend, then go have a shower and come back and try and argue with me.

[Samandri]

. Wazir Akbar Khan faced the infamous or even famous Hari Singh and there are some accounts saying he personally slew the Sikh general, although this may not be accurate. However he did die fighting Afghans.
.

Hari Singh Nalwa died while running way from the battle, towards the fort (Sikhs use word 'retreat' )......he received a bullet on his back.....not a graceful death.

Sikhs were always attacked whenever their army marched through Pashtun areas of present-day KP. On one occasion, in 1824, this Hari Singh Nalwa, was marching near Srikot where his 8 thousands strong army was attacked by small force of Mashwani and Saidkhani Pashtuns. Hari Singh's army lost 500 men and they fled towards Haripur. Hari Singh himself was struck down by a stone hurled from the walls of the village , and rolled into the ravine below and was saved but rumours were spread that he got killed. A white pillar , erected at later date by Major Abbot ,commemorates the scene of their victoryof Pashtuns over Hari Singh. Sikhs bullied peaceful Kashmiris but in Pakhtunkhwa they were getting hunted and they were unable to enforce ban on Azaan and cow slaughter. We are talking about Sikh army which was trained by European officers and half of it was commanded by French and Italian officers.

[toughpashtun]

Hari Singh Nalwa died while running way from the battle, towards the fort (Sikhs use word 'retreat' )......he received a bullet on his back.....not a graceful death.

Sikhs were always attacked whenever their army marched through Pashtun areas of present-day KP. On one occasion, in 1824, this Hari Singh Nalwa, was marching near Srikot where his 8 thousands strong army was attacked by small force of Mashwani and Saidkhani Pashtuns. Hari Singh's army lost 500 men and they fled towards Haripur. Hari Singh himself was struck down by a stone hurled from the walls of the village , and rolled into the ravine below and was saved but rumours were spread that he got killed. A white pillar , erected at later date by Major Abbot ,commemorates the scene of their victoryof Pashtuns over Hari Singh. Sikhs bullied peaceful Kashmiris but in Pakhtunkhwa they were getting hunted and they were unable to enforce ban on Azaan and cow slaughter. We are talking about Sikh army which was trained by European officers and half of it was commanded by French and Italian officers.

Samandri, what you have stated in this post is true,I am sure.
However, it is also correct that Sikhs were able to conquer a quite large portion of present day KPK province.
Can you summarize the main reasons why the Sikhs were able to take control of Pashtun areas and then rule them for some time?
And why did the Pashtuns not rise up against them(except the Syed Ahmad Shaheed movement),once the Sikhs had taken over their areas?

[Kabulistan]

That name Paul Gill I have seen on various anthro forums...he might be a selfhater....

But that said...I cannot deny that many NW Indians and Paki Punjabies as well are not Pure Indians, but rather descended of outside conquerors Central Asia/Iranian plateau and Local Indic populations...

If Persian was still the Main language in these regions the culturally Bond might have been stronger than its today...

[Adam]

I've seen this person on another forum, but I've never seen other sikhs anywhere describing themselves as a mixture of Central Asian and Persian, they're a pretty proud group of people who are not involved in all the "my ancestry is actually..." stuff you see from other South Asians.

[Samandri]

Samandri, what you have stated in this post is true,I am sure.
However, it is also correct that Sikhs were able to conquer a quite large portion of present day KPK province.
Can you summarize the main reasons why the Sikhs were able to take control of Pashtun areas and then rule them for some time?
And why did the Pashtuns not rise up against them(except the Syed Ahmad Shaheed movement),once the Sikhs had taken over their areas?

Discipline and European-trained army of Sikhs, equipped with large arsenal of European artillery commanded by European officers........ill-equipped tribal lashkars and parties of villages with no artillary and no fortified defences, did not stand a chance against it.......

Civil war of Barakzais and Saddozais.......

Almost every Pashtun district resisted Sikhs, but sporadically and with no discipline or unity.......Pashtun tribesmen were mostly carrying swords, shields and Jezails and were mostly on foot.......they were no match for artillery of Sikhs in plain areas

The only formidable fight was offered by army from Kabul which had artillery , in the battle in which Hari Singh was defeated.......

[Charsi Malang]

Discipline and European-trained army of Sikhs, equipped with large arsenal of European artillery commanded by European officers........ill-equipped tribal lashkars and parties of villages with no artillary and no fortified defences, did not stand a chance against it.......

Civil war of Barakzais and Saddozais.......

Almost every Pashtun district resisted Sikhs, but sporadically and with no discipline or unity.......Pashtun tribesmen were mostly carrying swords, shields and Jezails and were mostly on foot.......they were no match for artillery of Sikhs in plain areas

The only formidable fight was offered by army from Kabul which had artillery , in the battle in which Hari Singh was defeated.......

The tribal lashkar cannot fight properly on the plains as my brother Samandri states, especially against modern artillery and against cavalry charges.

The ruler Ranjit Singh was very able and had foreigners train and command his troops, some of them being Waterloo veterans. He also placed an Italian ruler in Peshawar. I think his name was Avitable, and was renowned for being cruel and merciless. Disunity had a major part also to play in this whole episode as the Saddozais and Barakzais hated each other's guts and did not fully unite in their efforts to gain back their lands. A similar situation occurred with Ahmad Shah baba when he was in conflict with the Sikhs. Internal problems at home caused him to divert his attention from the Sikh problem.

I have also read somewhere that the Sikhs tried to advance upon Waziristan but were defeated very badly.

[Traveller]

Yeah. The Sikhs got lucky. If they had come at a time when the Pashtun lands weren't in civil war they wouldn't have been able to take an inch of Pashtun land.

[Karachi]

I've seen this person on another forum, but I've never seen other sikhs anywhere describing themselves as a mixture of Central Asian and Persian, they're a pretty proud group of people who are not involved in all the "my ancestry is actually..." stuff you see from other South Asians.

Indeed, he is only one person, he loves to related to Europeans, Persians etc...

but Sikhs overall I guess might be like muslim punjabis, who just want to be persians or central asians. The thing is, Punjab was invaded so many times, this is why they have such inferiority complex