Bharat Rakshak

Yes, for something dear to the heart Naam, Namak and Nishan

Exactly, just like the English Education Methodology empowers Indian kids to better face the world and go about their “business & operations”, similarly Royal Navy Professionalism, Values, Qualities, etc, if I may call it Military Organization Methodology similarly empowered Indian Navy to better face the world and go about their “business & operations”.

Again, its respect & honour for the “methodology” and values, not for the geography, ethnicity or religion.

Yes my friend, since there was sore lack of ethos before that. Let me explain by the following example.

Kanhoji Angre built a strong Navy, but passed the leadership to his sons. They fought for power. The loser son sought Peshwa’s help who sought British help and, as a consequence, Kanhoji Angre’s Navy was shattered in a few years.So Kanhoji Angre’s Navy, despite its other sterling qualities, for the flaw of nepotism, cannot be the guiding light for the Indian Navy.

Royal Navy association, after 1612, introduced the concept of meritocracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_tact ... ge_of_Sail

So, 1612 and White Ensign respects and honours, among another qualities, meritocracy. Show me, forum members, examples of any Indian military leader who promoted meritocracy over nepotism.

Did Guru Drona promote meritocracy by respecting Eklavya’s capabilities over the royal progeny? Did Shri Krishna promote meritocracy by respecting Karna’s capabilities over the rest of the Pandavas? I would rather respect and honour the White Ensign for establishing meritocracy in the Indian military organization than Guru Drona or even Shri Krishna.

Yes, my friend, they did allow military leadership to Indians. While standard military leadership might have been denied earlier for political reasons, the British established a parallel leadership structure via Non Commissioned Officers, who provided equal leadership to the military organization. Every Ship or Division/Brigade/Battalion/Company commander respects NCOs who equally led men to battle. Senior NCO’s were also paid well.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... ilots.html I dont find any of these honourable warriors and commanders complaining about racial discrimination.

Now tell me, Abhishek, which Maharaja/Sultan allowed non family/royalty members to reach the highest levels in the Navy?

Yes, my friend, the Dharma Chakra or any similar symbol does not adequately represent the transformation in the military organization from 1612. 1612 was a turning point in the military organization.

Those who serve under the ensign do not share your feelings.

I am sorry, you are grossly mistaken, English can be taught as a subject in a Madrassa. Parents can teach children English using Rapidex English Speaking Course. English Medium is an education system wherein diverse subjects, including science, mathematics, social sciences, and language is taught.

How is the learning methodology of a Hindu Gurukul different than that of a Christian Monastery, Buddhist Vihara or Islamic Madrassa?

The “English Medium” learning methodology is ethnicity or religion agnostic. Schools are warmly adopted by all Indians instead of Gurukul, Monastery, Vihara or Madrassa because of the methodology, and not ethnicity or religiosity. All humans naturally adopt best practices very quickly. Unlike those who think polio drops is a conspiracy to steal virility

The science of statistics will tell you that Aryabhatta was an “outlier”. In simple terms, one or even ten Aryabhatta’s don’t reflect the general level of knowledge or education of the entire population. What did Aryabhatta do to widely disseminate his knowledge? Not much, even if he wished to. Even today, those parts of India without access to modern education methodology are woefully uneducated and illiterate.

Education & Knowledge was used for power and denied to the masses across the world. The Renaissance changed that by empowering masses with Education and Knowledge. Technological advances like printing press further helped. Let us not discredit the benefit of European Renaissance to mankind just because it was European, despite the same Europeans propagating very evil colonialism.

Yes, the samurais were killing each other like Indian feudal lords until the Meiji_Restoration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... estoration

The English are beginning to debate if their "education methodology" is "alienating" children. Do they deserve kudos for being the first to point out in the Queen's English that their methodology is flawed?

The acquisition of the Akula has started a debate in Pak on its "options" available to counter the IN.Nothing less than nuclear powered subs are the answer according to some "think tanks"!

Enjoy this great piece of revisionist history in full,where Pak maintains the edge in the Arabian Sea and INS Vikrant was a liability to the IN in '65 and '71! The ambitions of the TSP however must be factored in by our defence planners as from Pak's track record of "eating grass " if need be to acquire nuclear weapons,we may see the PRC come to the rescue of the PN yet again if only to maintain the PN's "advantage" in the Arabian Sea!

http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=140804

Xcpt:

http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=140804

Xcpt:


Fall face forward in a pile of shit, get up and walk away christening it the new and trendy deodorant.

So how many Indians were able to become the admirals of the navy?

tsarkar:
This is getting unnecessarily complicated. You assumed Kamorta class had one anchor to save weight without doing adequate research (NRao had to do that for you), you further claimed that they are changing designs on the fly. Two wrong don't make a right (nor does changes to the superstructure). You are free to continue splitting hairs to suit your position, I don't want to go bald with you.

Guru Drona was blind towards Arjun. Not only Eklavya, but also Radheya, i.e. Karna, was spurned by Drona. It was Drona's refusal to teach Radheya, that caused him eventually to tell a lie to Bhargava, i.e. Pashuram. We all know how tragic the consequence of that education would be for Radheya. But Drona was right that among the sons of Hastinapur, Arjun was by far the best in archery. He did not allow his love for his son cloud his judgement over Arjun. So yes Drona respected meritocracy even over his own blood ties. It is just that he believed in teaching the martial arts to restricted set of people. For that drona had to be faulted.

Krishna respected Radheya's capabilities. But he was not blind to Radheya's failing too. Radheya was incorrect in reading that his dharma compelled him to fight for Duryodhana. Yes he was indebted to Duryodhana, but his debt was repaid many times over, when he got brides for Duryodhana, just like Ganga Putra Devavrata did. Radheya again paid back his debt to Duryodhana when he alone was instrumental in carrying out the Rajasuya for Duryodhana. Let us not forget that Radheya did nothing when Panchali was disrobed in front of everybody on orders of Duryodhana. Radheya again did not prevent Duryodhana from the 2nd game of dice, which resulted in Pandav's exile. Krishna looked at the overall picture and correctly deduced that Radheya was as evil as Duryodhana and had to go. Only because of his tendency to turn a blind eye to adharma.

And the myth that Radheya was superior to Arjuna has persisted to this very day. Arjuna had defeated Radheya previously, for example on the last day of his exile. There are two variants to story of Drupadi's marriage. One is that Panchali stopped him. The second one is that Radheya took aim and missed. Choose one.

TSarkar, i can only tell you this. Your views are much more from materialistic viewpoint while not looking into much more broader view which can provide a very liberal and progressive view of India, it's civilization, it's culture, its traditions etc. That India is represented by symbols from historic times like the Dharma Chakra and so and so. Feeling proud about being under someone's control and feeling great about the machines they build during those times are the systems that they brought in are totally unwanted and uncalled for. We India and Indians do have things that did not require any symbols or anything that's alien to this land in anyway. Not that good things cannot be adopted or improved upon. Even you question how a Gurukul can be different from a Madrassa or a theological place. It itself stems from the belief that the Gurukul is a place where religion is taught or learned. Gurukul is a place to learn. That learning can be from religion to space science. Whatever is modern is learned. Gurukul just translates as a learning place. The way of learning may change, from the need to go to Guru's house or to attend Vishwa vidyalayas. But in Indian context Gurukul means the place to learn things. Do all humans adopt best practices very quickly? I don't know and don't think so. It also depends on ideology. Some people still want to live in caves, because of ideological restrictions. And after Meiji restoration, Japan did not go to war? I mentioned their technological achievements. From the Sword to their discipline. Have you watched the movie last Samurai? It shows how they lacked discipline when modernity took over. It never means that modernity can bring discipline. It's much more cultural. If Indian soliders were much more disciplined even under British, it gives credit to Indian culture and Indian civilization values.
And finally about removing British signs from Indian flags, my opinion is it must go. They did change it to this one.

Don't know why it was reverted back.
May be the Pseudo-Secularists cannot digest such a change. And that flag was a very nice one.
If there is going to be a change in the near future, i will surely prefer a golden background instead of the white and the naval crest in the front. The Golden color can represent the Golden age and the modern Indian Navy.

Tsarkar,

I followed your posts with great interest until you brought in the religion crap and some of the information you have cited could only have come from a person who is ensrhined in the well established western bias against dharmic religions.

By bringing in such religion comparisions and crap, you have eroded your basis of your argument. Instead of saying meritocracy, you have ultimately turned the flag of IN into a religious debate. Way to go, genius.

I do not agree with your assertions regarding the ethos enshrined in the St. George's Cross flag. Have you ever considered the Malabar Navy? What about naval traditions that extend 1000 years ago. By adopting the St. George's cross and saying that the naval traditions only go back 400 years ago, you are in effect saying that India only has a history of 400 years, and therefore tacitly accepting British arguments that they were the ones that created India and thereby, accepting the basis of servitude of Indians during their "Empire" Well bollocks, I don't accept that bullsh!t. We have naval traditions that extended more than 2000 years ago. Britain don't. Theirs only extend about 500 years.

Find a better argument and dont bring in the religious crap again. If you do, I will bring up the notoriety of the British navy, such as formenting the slave trade, piracy, flogging, etc. You will lose no matter what.

I am trying to find probable reasons. My post clearly uses the word "probable".

That does happen, George, irrespective whether your uncle is baking apple pie or a plum cake.

Since when did your qualify to pass judgment, George, especially when we're discussing hull, and you are referring to superstructure. Maybe your uncle can educate you on difference between hull and superstructure, and discipline you to be less of a brat.

I dont indulge in monkey business like you, George, so you may keep doing what you please.

My hairline is fine, as is the rest of my health. I participated in the Baltic Sprint Cup, completed the Mumbai full marathon and will traverse Kalindi Khal this summer.

Interesting debate!

First Indian officer who adorned Royal Indian Navy happened to be in 20th Century, right?

Is there any data on the first Indian sailor of EIC Navy and when? Similarly when & who was the first Indian NCO?

tsarkar:
The Elta 2238 on the superstructure (hence changes to the superstructure) on the Brahmaputra class (it's a class wide upgrade (not a design change on the fly) not limited to Beas BTW). That makes it three wrongs...but who is counting.

The rest of your reply...well......I encourage you to stick running marathons......Good Luck.

Alas who can understand Shri Krushna? Even in the dwapar yuga, there were only a handful who could recognize Him. In this grim age of Kali, it is inevitable that we get comments as above. For that matter what great Prophet/Avatar is respected/understood today? Sad.

You haven't answered how many non-royalty non-clan non-family military performers became leaders of Ancient Indian armies?

Maybe you didnt read, Sqn. Ldr. Arjan Singh, Sqn. Ldr. Haider, Sqn. Ldr. Prithpal Singh, Wg. Cdr. Subroto Mukherjee, Sqn. Ldr. Majithia, Sqn. Ldr. Niranjan Prasad, Jumbo Majumdar, Mehar Singh and Hem Chaudhuri commanded squadrons. Cariappa had reached flag rank and was a brigade commander.

Because nothing apart from theology was on the curriculum. Same holds true for a Monastary, Vihara or a Madarssa. If you know the curriculum was different, and Science, Civics and other subjects were taught, then please do share.

No uddu, we cannot use that movie as a reference, because its incorrect and pure fiction. While the screenplay is entertaining, it is not the truth. WW2 was a battle for industrial resources, and had nothing to do with Japanese religion or identity.

Can you substantiate your statement by providing references of collective discipline of Indians in any wars before 1612? Can you explain why Vitthal Vinchurkar and Damaji Gaikwad went on a cavalry charge instead of protecting the Gardi musketeers as ordered at Panipat? Is this not a classic example of indiscipline that lost the battle?

Funny, since you’ve touched on my religious affiliation, let me share my religious affiliation.

There was an ancestral Kali temple in my zamindari at Khulna that we rebuilt at Giridih at Bihar after partition, and thereafter moved it to Gobordanga in South 24 Paraganas after re-establishing the zamindari. The temple isn’t a family shrine, but a full fledged temple able to accommodate the entire village during festivals. My family has been celebrating Kali Puja for the entire village for the last 150 years at Khulna, Giridih and Gobordanga. Our zamindari, and our religious affiliation, is well known in the entire district. I am an orthodox Hindu. We are a family of professional warriors. My uncle, Major Bhaskar Roy, won the Maha Vir Chakra for his actions in 1965.

However, my family and I place professionalism over religion. Our service is our religion.

Did that navy show any innovation in battle? It was courageous, but was it innovative? No. All they made was massed boat charges. Despite Italians competing against Portuguese monopoly providing them cannons. More here. Having said that, their bravery is respected by naming INDQ as INS Kunjali.

I don’t deny that? But do we have any examples of virtues exhibited in military organization or at war? No. No one can set mythology as the guiding principle. It is Djinn philosophy.

I will ignore the rest of your post since it is immature emotional ranting. And despite all your emotional wailing, you have not provided one single instance of meritocracy in military organization in Hindu mythology or Indian history.

Lastly, my countrymen, Indian Navy is strong today because it’s professional, and not because it’s Indian. Ethnicity has never won battles throughout history across the world. Professionalism has on every occasion.

Let us build, honour and respect that professionalism instead of emotionally letting ethnicity take precedence over professionalism. This is my appeal as a professional to my countrymen.

My final remark on this subject is that the White Ensign is a mark of respect to professionalism at sea and has nothing to do with religion or ethnicity

interesting debate indeed

I don't have numbers about the Ancient Indian armies.



Maybe you didn't read properly. I was asking about the *highest* levels of armed forces. Let me repeat my question. How many Indians rose to become *admirals* of the navy during British rule?

Cariappa was a brigade commander. Any examples of an Indian 4-star general? Since the British brought professionalism in India, I am sure many Indians must have learnt enough to become 4-star generals (or their equivalent in the navy and air force)?

George, if you bother to check the facts with your uncle, then INS Beas, during building, incorporated design changes to include Elta 2238 and Deseaver suite. It was commissioned with Elta 2238 from day 1.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/166/18kc1.jpg/
http://www.biyokulule.com/sawiro/sawira ... 0Navy2.jpg
Brahmaputra and Betwa were commissioned with RAWS03 that was upgraded to Elta 2238. If you believe Beas had an upgrade instead of design change, please show evidence of Beas with RAWS03.
I am also General Manager, leading a Business Vertical of a Fortune 500 company. I have done well in life without your luck, so you may keep it for yourself as you sorely need it, since the real world may not take your lack of manners kindly.

Tsarkar,

just to answer your question regarding merits been chosen over family/religious matters, it happened at a time when probably west was still living in caves. Maharaj Bharat, on whoose name the nation has been named as Bharat, gave the throne to a ordinary soldier rather than his inept sons.

Lack of manners!!! I am being kind and gentle.

Fortune 500 huh? Awesome I am a cashier at Walmart, that means I work for Fortune 1.

I donno what a vertical is, is it some sort of elevator?

Tsarkar, you really painted yourself in a corner with that fairly off-the-mark remark. Since you want to compare Ancient armies and newer ones, why dont we compare ancient Roman armies of the time of Mahabharata with today's Indian army. Oops that wont work because hey there were no Europeans nations then.

So do you want to compare "professional" European armies of 1000 AD and around with modern Indian armies? Not that too?

So decide what you want to compare and we can take a shot at it in the historical battles thread. It will be intresting.



Incidentally I can effortlessly claim that they came from "royal" and "elite" classes of India then. So not really a statement of meritocracy really.



I would recommend that you read the section of Indian education in the book "Op Red Lotus" in short, what ever you have said is so grossly underinformed that there is no point talking unless you come up with proof that only theology was taught.

Again; wrong thread though. How about distorted history. Move this branch of discussion there, and we will have fun.



Again wrong thread, for that matter, any number of Royally born dunderheads charged with their platoons and their regiments on German lines in places like Somme and got slaughtered. So hey, lets not go there shall we.



I can easily, but wont, because tsarkar, I really find it amusing that you need to take this position, surely a poster of your merit should be able to easily provide these answers instead of asking them.



Look while I respect a IN sailor's love for his tradition, I must say the above remark is certainly a case of Macaulay's influence, I am sorry to say, and I am fully aware of how this comment will rankle you.

This is a statement like "sunday is a secular holiday" -- only goes to show how much we have forgotten and lost our moorings.

I really wonder what current crop of IN folks think about their older comrades painting the service as bunch of random mercenaries.

At least some "cultural legacy" of British Indian Armies seems to have survived, not withstanding the efforts like Naval rating uprising and such.

That we all agree wholeheartedly.

Sanku, dont mis-represent my comments. Officer Like Qualities include loyalty, that mercenaries dont have. Don't paint Officers, Gentlemen and Professionals as mercenaries.

Only you can claim Arjan Singh, Marshal of the Air Force, didnt rise from the ranks, and came from royalty. Such blatantly misleading statements make any factual and logical discussion futile.

Since we can effortlessly claim that the St George's cross stands for this and that, I wonder why the whole world is not aware of its legacy? Wiki certainly does not know, in fact it says a lot of interesting things which have nothing to do with issues like competence and professionalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_George's_Cross



Lot of secular, professional standards around the symbol of St George's cross, as opposed to those yahoo barbarian Indian symbols which people did not know how to wipe their arse with paper before the Great Britain took some of them and taught them their professional ways and made them special.

Loyalty of course, to whom is the question that you have posed before us unfortunately.

To the pay master? To St George's cross?

Cant be India, since being Indian has nothing to it being anything by your own statement.

Sanku, you are again wrongly twisting my statments and inferring wrong meaning that I never expressed.

Professionalism includes Loyalty to the service, for the cause, that happens to be the nation.

Professionalism comes above ethnicity. Let me explain by the following example. A wave swamping a sailor does not care whether he is Indian or any other nationality. A storm hitting a ship does not care about the registration of the ship. It is the sailors professionalism that keeps the ship safe in the storm.

Come to sea with me, Sanku. Let us see what kind of a man you are at sea. Anyone can type on the internet, join me at sea and check out your officer like qualities for yourself.

Tucchh Tsarkar, you had a whole host of names which you flaunted, surely you are trying to defend only one. Why? Anyway, you wanted to compare the meritocratic BIA with armies 1000 years past, why not compare the officer crop of European armies in WW I itself.

BTW on Arjan Singh; an Indian who gets English Education in Monetogmery (then, now Sahiwal) and studies in a College in Lahore and gets to go to England for training is a non elite Indian is it?

Well, that makes a MKG a commoner too.

Oh no, not at all, merely showing you the mirror, not my fault if you dont like the reflection. I have not said anything you did not, only that it seems funny when I say it.



Happens to be the nation. Yes I can believe that, since for a number of people, the cause can quite easily happen to be something else but not the nation, yet have same result (skill at a profession) however the skill does not determine whether they will work for the nation or not.

Did the skill of Purbia's working for EIC was good for India? (Oh sorry there was no India then right?)

Usually the choice of cause decides a patriot or a traitor or an opportunists.

But hey dont let such maudlin barbaric concepts dilute your "professionalism"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... ssionalism

: the following of a profession (as athletics) for gain or livelihood



Absolutely, unless the sailor is professional he can not keep the ship up. He has to be professional, a skill at seafaring combined with a passion for nation and the service is irrelevant. Those wont help.

Professionalism is important, after all livelihood is at stake along with the ship. Right?



I am all at sea already Sir. Trust me on that.

Since the words you use and honor certainly dont mean the same to the rest of the world that they do to you. Then you will accuse me of twisting.

I wonder if the English marauding the Indian merchant men in 1700s are looting pillaging and pirating (under the St George ensign of course) were being driven by a love of England and belief in English church or were being "professional".

Arjun became the leader of the Pandav army at birth because he was a prince. Same for Sadashiv Bhau at Panipat. Their capabilities and performance were never benchmarked against fellow warriors. They got leadership positions because of their social stature.

Arjan Singh rose from the ranks, moving from Pilot Officer/Flying Officer all the way up to Air Marshal. He rose from the ranks. His capabilities and performance was benchmarked against fellow warriors for every promotion. He got leadership position because of his merit and not birth.

Before the British military organization, did we have an impartial & objective assessment process? No. Give credit where its due.

The White Ensign, among other things, honours this impartial & objective assessment process.

It is not clear that we had an impartial assessment process during the British rule. I have asked you to give examples of 4-star Indian generals before 1947. You have not done so.

You are just trolling.

I hardly post but could not resist the urge to add to the 'bickering' going on here.....
Most of you seem to be mature in years but show flashes of immature youth no doubt ...a good thing actually

I have to say that you all have valid and well thought out points but beyond a certain point, become unreasonable when it comes to defending your point of view.

Professionalism indeed plays a decisive role in winning a contest. However, religious fervor has a power of its own - it may not have been studied scientifically but without doubt, it is an integral part of battle and has the power to clinch the deal.

Starting from Constantinople's acceptance of Christianity to Islamic fervor which no doubt reshaped history to our fight against the British, religion/spiritualism/dharma has been used by man to inspire, infuse courage, etc etc all with the professional (knowingly or unknowingly) objective of inculcating fearlessness in the fighter.

Shivaji no doubt had great strategy, improvised to win the situation, but without the foot soldier being inspired by 'har har mahadeo' would the battle have been won? ....maybe yes ...maybe no. Without worshipping Ma Bhavani or being given Mahabharata dharma lessons (by Shivaji's mother) would Shivaji be a known figure at all. What would Shivaji have done when the Maratha soldiers brought a beautiful muslim woman as prize for Shivaji - you can argue both ways now - he respected her because he was a professional or he respected her because he followed dharma (I suspect the latter). Shivaji's actions has a profound impact on history and India would be different without this great man. His actions no doubt were influenced by dharma. Same goes for the Rajputs. We look up to these people for inspiration - unfortunately our pseudo sicular politicians don't want these as part of the educational curriculum.

British used it as 'for God, queen and country' - it was almost a holy cause and it produced a marvelous fighter.

Professionalism and religion are intertwined I am tempted to believe. A contest cannot be won with only one of these attributes.

PS: Religion's ultimate objective is to realize the formless, attributeless God or consciousness or whatever word we choose to use. Hinduism is very clear about this and the form (idol) is used to ultimately reach this goal because as the philosophy goes, we believe ignorantly that we are the form as body (there are direct paths also like self inquiry which form part of core Hinduism). A lot of unnecessary political rules (caste etc) have been added by selfish individuals to further their cause but the wise should be able to sieve this out. Very few in today's India understand this and with our ever increasing materialistic outlook, reliance on law and order mechanisms will surely increase to maintain social harmony - this is where we are very very weak at the moment and hopefully it will not be the cause of our fall.

Again Sanku, I am not condoing British colonial exploitation. 99.99% of what they did was wrong. But they also did some things right, like an impartial judicial system, a scientific education system, etc. We're not respecting the British. It is these civilizational edifices that we're respecting.

sahi hai...can you tell us what punishment General Dyer got? Please also explain how it was fair and impartial.

If you had the penchant for facts rather than making emotional factually incorrect statements, you will find out that meritocracy, civil services examination, etc was started by the British.

Instead you make foolish flippant statements, and that is trolling.

FWIW, you haven't given a single example of a non clan non royalty person achieving leadership of the military organization through his merit in Ancient India.

Try shouting Jai Shri Ram or Jai Mata Di at an Exocet Armed Mirage or Harpoon Armed Agosta instead of fighting professionally. You'll realize Shri Ram too doesnt suffer nincompoops and fools.

Actually that shows the level to which you just dont understand India, in any Indian context, the leaders always lead from the front. So a royal will fight unlike a English royalty who hides in the back ground and gets "professionals" do work for him.

However, since you are persisting on being obtuse, let me quote some more names.

Drona was not a royal.
Neither was Parshuram.
Nor was Karna.

Was Chandragupta Mauyra?
Was Shivaji?
Was Hemu?
Was Tanaji Malasure?
Was Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose?
Was the Peshwa Generals in the begining?
Was Tatya Tope?

So kindly dont embrass yourself sir, you are being given a lot of rope, some one else making such statements would have the gloves off.



Dear Tsarkar -- in 1940s, ANY Indian coming to a English college education was a prince for all practical purposes, a person already preselected by British to be "their" Prince.

No different from a son of Kanhoji Angre.

Rising from ranks was not too difficult after that preselection.

I would know, since we are discussing family history, I have some in my family as well.




Yes, we did, in fact better than the British. In Indian organizations, a son of Oil merchant could be Empror. How many professionals in BIA did that?

Sorry, that was a collection of mercenaries and coolies, we still have quite a few Indians in that role in MNCs and such (that may include me as well, so dont take it personally just in case you think its personal attack)



It is a symbols of Crusade, of English church and English history.

Cognitive dissonance is all fine, but I would expect some one like you to be able to see the truth in face without flinching.

Foolish statements? You had the gall and chutzpah to pontificate on "meritocracy" during the British period. But you can't provide a single example of 4-star general of Indian origin before 1947. This selective amnesia is a sign of very high levels of honesty.

Flippant? Are you asking for respect? I believe you are getting too much respect in this conversation.



Except for the fact that all the officers at the highest levels were British who could overrule the recommendations of the civil service. So much for your "meritocracy". Only a very smart person could overlook this fact.

Chandrgupt Maurya..what were his antecedents? Malik Ambar? Do these examples fit the criterion?

tsarkar,

have you read up on Chola history? perhaps you should inform the rest of us how the Cholas went on to conquer vast portions of SE Asia and colonize them not just with war but also establishing Sanatana Dharma in that portion, without meritocracy, "ethos", "discipline" and all the other buzzwords that you are using.

you should also go ahead and explain to us dimwitted jingoes how Arab penetration of SE Asia was delayed by more than a century by the Cholas, without "discipline"/"ethos"/"meritocracy", etc.....at the height of its power, the Cholas were the most powerful naval force in the world. neither in the Mediterranean (Italians, Normans, Byzantium, Almoravids, Almohads, Salahaddin) nor in the IOR was there a challenger to Chola naval power at its height. the above mentioned are the other powerful naval traditions of the time and none of them could even remotely match the sophistication or the overall might of the naval power of the Cholas.

a little history should do you some good. it might expand your horizons a bit!

^^tsarkar,

Are you referring to the education system that introduced Aryan Invasion theory? Pretty scientific indeed...


I really cannot believe that our esteemed Navy lacked the imagination to come up with a visible sign, instead of reverting back to the symbol (IMO) of slavery, colonolialism and religious barbarity (crusade). Hopefully it will be corrected in the future.