1) Facing Alexander's soldiers, Porus sends his troops on break on sundown thus giving the Macedonians the advantage.
this historical facts should be read with pinch of salt. your histroy is written by foreigners (old colonial masters) where alexander the gay is great but 'chengiz khan' is not, chandra gupta is not, Samudra Gupta is not. Then there are many Like Shivaji Maharaj, Raghoba Rane and many more. But they want you to learn only about Prithviraj' losing, Porus's losing. Selective History. We need to come out from this vicious circle.
2) Pritviraj battled and prevailed over Mahmud of Gazni several times and at one time even captured him. After each failure, Gazni is surprised that the Indians did not pursue him. After capture, Gazni is set free thus giving him a chance to regroup, replenish and come back for another try. Finally, he emerges victor and vanquishes Pritviraj.
Time and again you are told about this story, to wash your brain that you are forgiving kinda people and keep on forgiving.
You are never told/taught much about the Might of Chandraguptas or Samudraguptas. You are not even told about sikh rulers of kashmir and tibet. Even not much about Shivaji Maharah and Peshwas, about Bhimdev Solanki and Raja BHOJ.
so we always crib about what we MISSED and not what we ACHIEVED and thus negative auto-suggestion of a loser.
EAGLES are told that they are not eagles but something else.
Why can't we ACCENTUATE the positives of Indian History. Try to re-write the 'original' history.
3) Nehru, while the military held the upper hand in Kashmir agrees to a ceasefire thus forever dooming India's chance of having a contiguos land border with Central Asia that would be such a God send in light of India's imense hunger for fosil fuel to power her expanding economy.
4) Nehru neglects the military's needs and India pays with her soldiers' lives and territories to China.
India was again in the hands of Indians and had no experience of running a country democratically for last 1400 years. A novice was at the helm. this was/can be a mistake or something else.
5) India captures almost a hundred thousand Pakistani prisoners in 1971, yet none was ever tried for war crimes which under internaitonal law many of them deserved to be tried. Instead of making a hard bargain, they are freed without condition-according the Benazir Butto even her father was surprised because before Simla summit, he had confessed to her that Indira held all the cards and Pakistan's future depended on her.
6) Pakistani troops violated the LOC and occupied Indian territory. India mounts a limited but brutal military campaign without opening other front. When total victory is at sight, India agrees to let the enemy withdraw thus letting the enemy walk away without more casualty.
bargaining for live solders? forgot Kargil? They are even not ready to honour the deads. with whom you are dealing dude?
7) The enemy audaciously attempts to attack the Parliament house. Instead of conducting a quick punitive strike, India mounts a prolonged conventional buildup to rattle down the enemy. All the resources expended in this buildup was actually a waste of scarse resource and in some instance revealed some of India's mobilization secrets. In the end it came to nothing.
the enemy worn out without fighting. YOU are WINNIG and Enemey has LOST. You have 1 Billion to feed. You have ambition to become something and not Jihadis. You want to grow persistently. What is wrong if you WIN without losing...