To people outraging over Sikh Regiment versus Sikh Light Infantry, do you know that The President's Bodyguard recruits ONLY from Hindu Jats, Hindu Rajput and Jat Sikhs? Your topic of the day for outrage 😝
BTW,when the society itself cannot get Jat Sikhs and Mazhabi Sikhs to live together, how do you expect them to form a cohesive fighting unit? And no, please don't bring in the example of All-India, All-Class Regiments or Corps as a counter. Because in these Regiments or Corps, +
+ no single community dominates. An all encompassing Sikh Regiment is different from a Punjab Regiment which will have a mix of Jat Sikhs and Mazhabi Sikhs. Because it also has men across all castes from Punjab, Himachal and parts of J&K. And as a soldier, one desires to join +
+ the army or a specific Regiment? No one is turned down from army requirement because of caste or class. Unless, if it is regiment specific. And since we're focusing on caste here, well, how about this. A Brahmin from UP cannot join most of the infantry regiments which recruit +
+ soldiers from UP, unless he opts for, and clears examination for clerical roles. But does it mean that he can't join the Army? Nope. There are enough opportunities for that across other infantry regiments, armored, artillery, and other arms. Please don't Services a lab for +
+ your social experiments. Don't mend something which isn't broken.
And BTW, you've to be 6 feet tall to be eligible for The President's Bodyguard. Now, waiting for shorties association of India for equal opportunity to outrage against this as well.
On why ethnicity, class, caste and region specific Regiment system works - hear it from horse's mouth. You're looking from outside, please look at this perspective from within.
https://twitter.com/Manik_M_Jolly/status/1440214920314822664?s=19
While we're at this topic of composition of the Indian Army, I'd like to address one more point - Many people call British Indian Army as mercenaries. And current Indian Army as colonial. While I understand where they are coming from, I'd like to point that this interpretation +
+ is because of lack of understanding on why men fight.
- And remain loyal to their oath, even to peril of their life.
- For ex, had British Indian Army been all mercenaries, most POW in Burma or Singapore or West would've gone over to Bose or Germans.
- But that was not +
- And remain loyal to their oath, even to peril of their life.
- For ex, had British Indian Army been all mercenaries, most POW in Burma or Singapore or West would've gone over to Bose or Germans.
- But that was not +
+ the case.
- Many died facing Japanese brutalities but could not bring themselves to betray their oath.
- It is a complex subject and if you would like to read more on it, please do read:
"A Matter of Honour: An Account of the Indian Army, Its Officers and Men"
- Many died facing Japanese brutalities but could not bring themselves to betray their oath.
- It is a complex subject and if you would like to read more on it, please do read:
"A Matter of Honour: An Account of the Indian Army, Its Officers and Men"
- The book does suffer from some romantic notions, but overall, its a wonderful book.
- It will tell you, why men fight, and why do they follow their leaders to certain death.
- Its a good primer to understand this complex subject of what makes a man charge a machine gun!
- It will tell you, why men fight, and why do they follow their leaders to certain death.
- Its a good primer to understand this complex subject of what makes a man charge a machine gun!
In this debate about army's class, and caste composition, do read and reflect on this as well.
https://twitter.com/LestWeForgetIN/status/1440166173765619717?s=20
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
