Jump to content

Are Sikhs addicted to appeasing "others" at their own cost


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You could be a big Singh too, who's docile. Then they're probably thinking "Oh these are the canon fodder we used. Bravo." I remember a few years ago some english twat in the pub saying, "Sikhs were t

Usually, in the above particular example, that surface public image tends to conceal a darker reality. But in our case in recent times we've adopted this demeanour not because we're genuine Nice Guys,

https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventrys-langar-aid-rallies-feed-21446995 Coventry's Langar Aid rallies to feed Afghan refugees arriving at Birmingham Airport "Lan

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

What do you propose we view them as when they become the enemy again ONLY because they were nursed back to health by our side? If we keep healing them and they return to reduce our numbers thanks to our demented efforts to please God knows who, what then? It's cloud cuckoo-land. Who fights a war to WIN with such a horribly confused philosophy hanging over their heads?

 

Too late for this now. My cynical self suspects this to be revisionisim to save face or rectify centuries of damaging parchaar that has had the opposite affect of what was intended. NOT ONE giani or kathavachak has EVER contextualised Bhai Kanaiya's escapades on the battlefield by discussing his martial prowess. The sakhi has always been employed as a tool to illustrate compassion and fairness. If we suddenly start hearing about how Bhai Sahib cut off Mughal limbs and heads one moment, and then provided water to dying Mughals a few minutes later, we'll become an even bigger laughing stock than we already are.

plenty of brahmgiani gursikhs killed mughals and dusht on battlefields does this mean we Believe that they are not like Akal Purakh ? Sikhi's concept is that Akal is ALL things: so destroyer AND creator  where as Christian concept is God is all things good but all things Bad are of the Devil .... seems that this concept has been overlaid onto our ancestors histories to remove the 'complete/nondual' aspect  of sikhi i.e. distort what we are aiming for ..........

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

The people getting roped into fighting wars will need PHDs in religious philosophy and an extra requirement of rubber brains to navigate the mental gymnastics apne churn out at times to justify certain concepts.

Just accept it's okay to want to see your enemy dead. I don't want to hug him or love him. I want his blood, not his friendship. The rest are superfluous concepts too complex for Punjabi minds that have never been adhered to in the cold harsh reality of war, and if true would get good men killed needlessly.

when you are on war footing you protect yourself and your own unless you're a total mental case , and a proper warrior is not driven by anger/wrath because it makes you careless and vulnerable to manipulation; that's why being nirbhau nirvair mentality releases you from that trap. You have a duty on the field and in daily life and the two need you to be unwavering in your aim ; I believe that the code of conduct that Dashmesh Pita ji gave us for the battlefield is the best ; do not attack the surrendered, the ones fleeing the field, the women/children/elderly i.e. be a honourable person. Meet the enemy and fight to the best of your ability , prisoners that are taken should be treated well .(was done in both world wars by apnay for POWs who have commented on the strange turbanned men who shared their rations and did not beat or torture them)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jkvlondon said:

when you are on war footing you protect yourself and your own unless you're a total mental case , and a proper warrior is not driven by anger/wrath because it makes you careless and vulnerable to manipulation; that's why being nirbhau nirvair mentality releases you from that trap. You have a duty on the field and in daily life and the two need you to be unwavering in your aim ; I believe that the code of conduct that Dashmesh Pita ji gave us for the battlefield is the best ; do not attack the surrendered, the ones fleeing the field, the women/children/elderly i.e. be a honourable person. Meet the enemy and fight to the best of your ability , prisoners that are taken should be treated well .(was done in both world wars by apnay for POWs who have commented on the strange turbanned men who shared their rations and did not beat or torture them)

How many wars have you personally fought in?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

How many wars have you personally fought in?

not many but being blind angry cripples you as a fighter , and that is why ALL martial arts teach people to center themselves and fight from a thinking stance not allowing rage/haumai to creep in . Been in plenty of mulitiple on one fights as a youngster and being cool headed and somewhat detached gave me space to think and work my side better.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

not many but being blind angry cripples you as a fighter , and that is why ALL martial arts teach people to center themselves and fight from a thinking stance not allowing rage/haumai to creep in . Been in plenty of mulitiple on one fights as a youngster and being cool headed and somewhat detached gave me space to think and work my side better.

Where have I argued any differently? I've suggested a soldier does the job definitively so that his enemy can't be nursed back to health by a religious do-gooder. If someone wants to enter God's Abode, I'd argue the battlefield is the last place to virtue signal. It shows a distinct lack of concern for one's fellow brothers in arms. It's actually incredibly short sighted and selfish. I'm beginning to suspect these tales have been constructed by people who've never had to fight in their lives, because only such people could ever completely ignore the reality of war.

For one moment, imagine trying to emulate the aforementioned example during the siege of the Golden Temple in June 84. What would you imagine Sant Jarnail's Singh's reaction would be if a young Singh helps an Indian soldier back on to his feet after another Singh had done his best to finish the job during that hellish siege? If your reply is anything other than, "annoyed" then you've been seduced by the Hollywood-isation of reality. Imagine actually practising in REAL-LIFE what we're told is a virtue that must be adhered to if we're "true" Sikhs. Mind-boggling.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MisterrSingh said:

Where have I argued any differently? I've suggested a soldier does the job definitively so that his enemy can't be nursed back to health by a religious do-gooder. If someone wants to enter God's Abode, I'd argue the battlefield is the last place to virtue signal. It shows a distinct lack of concern for one's fellow brother in arms. It's actually incredibly short sighted selfish. I'm beginning to suspect these tales have been constructed by people who've never had a fight in their lives.

For one moment, imagine trying to emulate the aforementioned example during the siege of the Golden Temple in June 84. What would you imagine Sant Jarnail's Singh's reaction would be if a young Singh helps an Indian soldier back on to his feet after another Singh had done his best to finish the job during that hellish siege? If your reply is anything other than, "annoyed" then you've been seduced by the Hollywood-isation of reality. Imagine actually practising in REAL-LIFE what we're told is a virtue that must be adhered to if we're "true" Sikhs. Mind-boggling.

Dashmesh Pita ji said jujh ke lado , if someone happens to survive I doubt that they would be able to fight intact (lopped off arm/leg major wounds) and according to that if Akal Purakh has deemed that person life we can't kill that injured person so we can do minimum thing of water . Rest is up to Guru ji

Soldiers felled are  meant to either be dead or prisoners nothing more or less

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Dashmesh Pita ji said jujh ke lado , if someone happens to survive I doubt that they would be able to fight intact (lopped off arm/leg major wounds) and according to that if Akal Purakh has deemed that person life we can't kill that injured person so we can do minimum thing of water . Rest is up to Guru ji

Soldiers felled are  meant to either be dead or prisoners nothing more or less

Treating the injured prisoners of other forces well is the sign of any civilized people. It doesn't really return soldiers back to fight for the enemy so much as protect your forces from degrading themselves with poor behavior and secure a legacy even in the minds of your enemies what a civilized people you are. It does play well in history and help greatly with doplomacy once you're victorious. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2021 at 2:42 PM, GurjantGnostic said:

Ahh the beast of Daswand and Daan, which is which, and which to do. 

Both. Always. 

In the order of Daswand. Then Daan. Just like you put on your oxygen mask then your own childs sitting next to you. You don't question which. Nobody respects you if you only do either one. 

But if you confuse Daswand and Daan and use their funds for each other that is not right either. 

What they did for farmers protest aswell as covid India is amazing. They have been subject to cancer hindvasta media trolls. I know the criticism they'd get including myself was to keep Sikhs priority first and and foremost when we've got so many issues and not enough power as others.  

Farmers protest they'd been at front ends. Seeing hindustas trolls also made me understand why they do what they do not to give into the RSS propaganda that we are made to fight islamists seethes them.

Wish they'd be more centred not give into left-right views imo.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

History... written... victors... etc.

Losers of wars are seldom are provided the courtesy of constructing the narrative and terms of their defeat. If anything they're demonised and humiliated, and accused of doing the very feats they were at pains to avoid.

Agreed. But when you win you leave a permanent first foot forward in the minds of the defeated and their generations. So yes we must win. And we must win our way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

Dashmesh Pita ji said jujh ke lado , if someone happens to survive I doubt that they would be able to fight intact (lopped off arm/leg major wounds) and according to that if Akal Purakh has deemed that person life we can't kill that injured person so we can do minimum thing of water . Rest is up to Guru ji

Soldiers felled are  meant to either be dead or prisoners nothing more or less

I've heard after the desecration of Harmandir Sahib by Abdali (or some wretched tonda), Sikhs slaughtered a bunch of sullay there, and used prisoners to clean up the defiled sarowar.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Ok I will help by getting 2 wives and having 100s mistresses and forcing my kids to be Sikh. Guess I've done my part.
    • Do you think our guys in the West are as prone to the dramatics as resorting to suicide? I personally think they've thrown in the towel; a quiet acceptance of defeat which is mostly attributable to the broader culture that has compounded the idea that it's toxic for a man to question a lady about her antics. 
    • If he's just going to kill himself on finding that out, that's unfortunate but fair enough. But don't start killing other people as well, including the b1tch. 
    • This is the absolute crux of the matter; to find a girl who's pretty enough to get the lad hot and bothered BUT not too pretty that her attractiveness has made her a target for other lads from the moment, as they say in Punjabi, her jawani char gayi in her mid-teens onwards. Before the undercover brahmgyanis chime in about prioritising kamayi and Gurmukh values, for those of our people who don't float around in their own little Satyug that keeps the rest of the Kalyugi world out (a bit like Trump's non-existent wall), these are valid considerations that should be looked at in detail for the rank-and-file people of our community. If the guy himself is between the 4-7 range of attractiveness, he needs to look for a girl within the same range. BUT Punjabi guys (and men in general) over-estimate their physical appeal. A man, more than anyone, has a tendency to inflate his own sense of being. He finds it very difficult to process that he may not be what he thinks he is. A guy in this 4-7 range (which is the vast majority of males on the planet) going after a 9 or 10 girl is living in cloud-cuckoo land if he thinks even a typically middle-class, middle-income job (£30-60k) is going to keep a top-tier girl placated for the next 40-50 years of her life (or at least until she lets her self go or hits the menopause depending on what comes first. Even then her appeal to men may fade, but her aadataa -- habits -- will be nigh on set in stone. If they're rotten since decades eariler, the guy is in for trouble). I'd go as far to say that even a multi-millionaire would need to be on-top of his game from the day he's married to the day he drops dead in order to keep a 9 or 10 as his wife. Today, more than ever, a girl's history counts so much. From what I've seen, the majority of apne guys live in a world that is detached from reality. They may consider themselves street-smart and worldly, but in many respects their understanding of the world is, IMO, based on an inaccurate simulation of a wider culture they don't truly understand. As such, those blind-spots is where they end up being blind-sided by the unforeseen. Then you've got to figure out whether her jawani had indeed gone to her head quite a while ago, or if she's been sensible with it. The answer to this question, IMO, comes IN PART from studying the immediate family, i.e. the dad, mum, and siblings.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use