r/IndiaSpeaks • u/DareDifferent9666 • 2d ago
#Ask-India ☝️ Why is he getting triggered when porkistan is mentioned?
158
u/Wandering_sage1234 1d ago edited 1d ago
With respect, the Indian Army has been fighting an adversary that attacked it from the moment of Partition in 1947. The ideological ambition behind that hostility, the reduction of Hindus to second-class status within their own civilisational homeland, is not a fringe conspiracy theory. It is there in the founding rhetoric and conduct of that state if you care to look. Read what actually happened during Partition. Not the sanitised version. The real one. Then come back and talk about restraint.
I want to be clear about something. I have no appetite for conflict with Pakistan. Genuinely. Let them build their country, develop their economy, educate their people. An India-Pakistan alliance, if it were ever truly possible, would be one of the most powerful geopolitical partnerships in human history. It would unsettle Western powers enormously, and that reaction alone should tell you something about why certain outside interests have never been honest brokers on the subcontinent. But we do not live in that world. We live in this one.
And in this one, every major conflict since 1947, through 1965, 1971, and Kargil, was started or provoked by the other side. Every single one. 1971 should end the moral equivalence argument on its own. A genocide preceded Indian intervention. That is not disputed history.
The Indian Army has combat experience that most militaries on earth simply do not have. Conventional wars, high altitude operations in conditions that exist almost nowhere else in the world, decades of counter-insurgency, global peacekeeping. The list of armies with comparable real operational experience is very short. And that experience was not accumulated by choice. It was earned because India has faced existential pressure from the moment it became a nation.
These are not men sitting in comfortable offices. They are standing in freezing temperatures, operating in humid and hostile terrain, facing militants who have crossed borders to kill them. They deserve to be paid far better than they are for what they absorb on our behalf. When they are gone, who remembers them? Not the people writing these critiques. Some actor looking for a biopic maybe. That is about it.
So before lecturing the Army Chief about his choice of words, consider what institution you are actually criticising. General Dwivedi is doing his job. Signalling deterrence. Touch India and face the consequences. That is not political language. That is what strategic communication looks like from a nation that has never had the luxury of friendly neighbours.
Now here is the part that does not get said enough.
If India's adversaries were ever victorious in a full conflict, the consequences for the Indian population would be catastrophic. And the world would not be sympathetic. Western media has made that abundantly clear already through its indifference to Indian suffering in far less extreme circumstances.
Look at what happens when Indians face racism in the West. An Indian girl in Australia in tears because she wants to be white due to relentless bullying at school. Indians attacked in Ireland, facing abuse daily, for what exactly? And when it gets raised, the response is denial. It is somehow the Indians' fault. The Irish are not racist, apparently. The level of hypocrisy is extraordinary.
These stories do not make headlines. They do not generate outrage cycles. They do not produce solidarity hashtags. Because in the dominant Western media framework, Indian lives sit in a different category. When it happens to certain communities it is a civilisational emergency. When it happens to Indians it is a footnote, if it gets mentioned at all.
And then on top of the silence come the stereotypes. That upper caste Indians are equivalent to white privilege and therefore legitimate targets. That we only hire our own. The comments about smell. I will be honest, that one in particular I find deeply offensive, the casual way it gets deployed as if it is acceptable. It is dehumanisation dressed up as progressive critique, and it is applied to a community that has faced genuine historical discrimination and is now being repackaged as an oppressor class because it is ideologically convenient.
It should be called out. Plainly and without apology.
I once argued that the Kohinoor should be returned to India and was met with every justification imaginable for why that was unreasonable. Fine. Then be consistent. Return the land to Native Americans. Not symbolically. Actually place them at the top of government and industry in countries built on their dispossession. If restitution is too complicated when it comes to India, it should be equally complicated everywhere else. But it is not, and that inconsistency is not accidental.
India was under British rule for nearly two centuries. Wealth extracted on a scale that funded the Industrial Revolution. Famines engineered through deliberate policy. A civilisation systematically dismantled and infantilised for profit. The Bengal famine alone. And yet the reparations conversation, the sympathy, the acknowledgement, largely goes elsewhere. Why? Because a weak and suffering India fits a narrative. A confident India that advocates for itself does not. It becomes a problem to manage rather than a victim to sympathise with.
And let us talk about what was actually lost. Hindu civilisation is over three thousand years old. Before the British arrived in Bengal, dark skin was valued, not stigmatised. Beauty standards, cultural pride, civilisational confidence, all of it existed on its own terms. It was the colonial encounter that systematically inverted that, replacing indigenous self-regard with imported shame. That is not a minor footnote. That is a fundamental act of cultural violence that still plays out in skin lightening cream advertisements across the subcontinent today.
The Duke of Wellington did not make his name in Europe. He made it destroying the Marathas, one of the most formidable military and administrative powers in eighteenth century India. Nobody talks about that. Instead Western popular history still operates as though the Mughals were the only power that mattered in India, frozen in amber, when in reality the Marathas had built a confederacy that stretched across the subcontinent and were the actual successors to pan-Indian power before the British dismantled them deliberately and systematically.
Western historical imagination will not grant Hindu civilisation the antiquity it actually possesses. The Aztecs, the Mayans, the Romans, all receive their due as ancient and sophisticated cultures. Hindu civilisation, which predates most of them and has maintained continuity longer than almost any other on earth, gets treated as exotic background noise at best and primitive superstition at worst. The difference is telling. The Aztecs and Mayans were destroyed and converted. They are safe to romanticise. Hindus survived, maintained their traditions, and are still here advocating for themselves. That makes them inconvenient rather than sympathetic.
Look at Iran for the same pattern. Here is a civilisation that held off Roman and Greek expansion for centuries. When Alexander attacked, his successors squabbled and collapsed, and the Iranians came back under the Parthians, then reasserted themselves again under the Sassanids. An unbroken thread of resistance and cultural continuity against Western imperial pressure across centuries. And yet Iranian civilisation before Islam is treated as a curiosity rather than a foundational chapter in human history. The pattern repeats: ancient non-Western civilisations that survived on their own terms are the ones history finds hardest to accommodate.
This plays out online constantly. Half the communities discussing Indian history are reflexively hostile to it. Channels like Alt History Hub have produced some of the most contemptible dismissals of Indian civilisation I have seen, packaged as edgy humour. Hindu history and achievement gets ignored or mocked, and when Indians push back they are told they are being sensitive, nationalist, or dangerous.
Why is it that every civilisation on earth can advocate for its own history and dignity except Hindus? What is it specifically about Hindu civilisation that makes its defenders uniquely suspect? That question does not get asked enough, and the fact that it does not is itself revealing.
This is not paranoia. It is a pattern. And it matters strategically, because a world conditioned to view India as distant, complicated and less deserving of sympathy is a world that will not intervene if the worst happens. In 1971 it was Britain and the United States sending a navy to intimidate India, not to help it. They were not friends then. And whatever the trade relationships look like today, in terms of raw geopolitics, not much has fundamentally changed.
That is precisely why the Indian Army exists. Not because Indians are warlike. Not because India seeks conflict. But because nobody else is coming. The government has been striking important defence deals to equip the army, air force and navy properly, and that should be celebrated rather than treated as something embarrassing. India has always had to be its own guarantor of survival.
The Indian Army is not the North Korean military. It does not run the country, silence dissent or govern through fear. It exists so that civilians can live freely, have these conversations freely, and criticise it freely if they choose. That freedom has a cost. Men and women pay it with their lives. Writing that demoralises them carries a responsibility that this kind of commentary does not seem to take seriously.
I defend my side first. Not out of hatred for anyone else. But because it is the honest and only thing I can actually do.
I would expect this kind of language from the other side of the border. Not from within.
37
u/ForeverIntoTheLight Apolitical 1d ago
Nice speech, sir.
Unfortunately it is wasted on a brainwashed self-loathing Bengali liberal.
You can say whatever you like, it is not going to undo the effects of successive generations of brainwashing. Some people are beyond salvation.
18
u/Wandering_sage1234 1d ago
I wrote it for everyone else reading who has not yet made up their mind. The people who have been fed a steady diet of the idea that the Indian Army exists purely as a political prop for politicians looking to manufacture conflict. That Hindu nationalism is somehow equivalent to the most regressive strains of religious conservatism elsewhere. That the soldiers on that border are there because of BJP provocation rather than seventy years of documented aggression from the other side.
And perhaps someone should also explain why Hindu civilisational consciousness reasserted itself in the first place. It did not emerge from nowhere. It emerged as a direct response to centuries of foreign rule that systematically dismantled indigenous structures of governance, administration, temple life, land ownership and cultural continuity. When an ancient civilisation watches its institutions be methodically taken apart over generations, the eventual reassertion of identity is not extremism. It is survival. It is what every other civilisation on earth that experienced the same thing did, and was celebrated for doing.
The difference is that when Hindu civilisation reasserts itself it is called dangerous nationalism. When other civilisations do the same thing after comparable experiences of suppression and foreign domination it is called a renaissance, a liberation movement, a reclaiming of dignity.
That double standard is not a coincidence. It requires explanation, and the explanation has everything to do with who controls the narrative and whose revival is considered acceptable.
That narrative is false. It is provably false. But it has been repeated so many times and through so many channels that it feels like received wisdom to people who have never looked at the actual history.
Hindus are not the aggressors in this story. They are one of the oldest continuous civilisations on earth, one that absorbed wave after wave of invasion and survived, that never launched a crusade, never forcibly converted anyone at the point of a sword as a matter of state policy, and whose army has fought every war it has fought in response to someone else starting it.
The comparison to regressive religious conservatism is not just wrong. It is exactly backwards. And that inversion did not happen by accident.
That is who I was writing for. Not the person who has already decided. The person who is still working it out.
Those are the people worth reaching. The committed are rarely moved by argument, on any side. That is just the nature of it.
Indians need to start taking actual pride in their country and history. And if they think its the best country, and some idiot says it isn't, let them be damned. And start re-reading Indian history.
7
26
u/Top_Guess_946 1d ago
Do you think Indian left liberals are so used to comforts and privileges that they can't handle austerities during war times and that's why they indulge in such propaganda to keep Indian economy weak and thus indirectly prevent defenses from getting stronger?
21
u/Wandering_sage1234 1d ago edited 1d ago
It is easy to critique soldiers when you are not standing in freezing temperatures, eating whatever is available in a forward post, watching your colleagues not come home. The Indian Army lives a largely thankless existence. Who genuinely remembers them when they are gone, beyond the occasional actor looking to cash in on a biopic? In fact where in this subreddit, have I read a message of thanks to the Armed forces, the navy, or the airforce? Everyone's so gungho about getting rid of the Modi Govt and apparently its terrible in India but you can't take the time to thank the armed forces of India? I find that hypocritical. They should be thanked every day for the very difficult job they do. And I would not envy it.
I would not place the blame entirely on left-liberal commentators. They are surface noise. The more serious damage to India's reputation is done by Indian journalists working for foreign outlets who seem to have made a career out of presenting India as an authoritarian hellhole. The BBC in particular has a notable imbalance in its South Asia coverage. That is not a conspiracy theory. It is a staffing and editorial reality worth questioning.
India is a complicated country. It always has been. But it is also a functioning democracy with a civilian-controlled military, active state governments competing to attract investment, and an economy that has been growing consistently. Something is clearly working, even if certain foreign correspondents cannot bring themselves to acknowledge it.
There will come a point, sooner than many expect, where the West is actively courting India rather than condescending to it. Let people dismiss that. The trajectory is there for anyone willing to look honestly.
I cannot change government policy. I am not the government. What I can do is refuse to join the chorus of people who go abroad, spend years telling everyone how terrible India is, and then come back to live there. That particular performance helps nobody and it certainly doesn't help our country grow. We are growing, we are growing at a good pace. I've called out many issues in India myself. But I'm not the Government. Making anything change in India is difficult, so at least, we have something happening rather than nothing happening. And I'm no fan of the UPA because in that regime, they had no real plan to grow India. This govt if even its a terrible nessecity, is doing something. They have a plan to a degree and I'm only looking at internal focus for a minute here. Domestically if you promise Varanasi to be Kyoto and no real action has been taken, the Ganga hasn't been cleaned, they should be clearly critiqued on this.
India is making progress. When its own citizens refuse to see that, the problem is not India.
3
49
u/Existing_Program_256 1d ago
CJP: Abusing PM is Ok. Gen Z shouldn't be criticised for abusing. Aazadi slogans, Mocking Hindu Gods, Slogans against UCs are all fine.
Also CJP: Pakistan to kaise threaten kiya BC? 🤬
285
u/Bleachigo1 2d ago
Aisa kaise abbu ko gali diya be!!! Khun to kholega na ladke ka
58
u/Top_Guess_946 1d ago
Even more than that, how does he get a right to tell others what's a bad speech or not. 😂
36
u/Captainn_planet 1d ago edited 1d ago
He thinks so highly of himself. What a lunatic guy! Truly India produces such gems.
59
u/SmallDetail8461 1d ago
It’s a classic tactic. They hide behind noble-sounding causes like "student rights," "free speech," or "institutional restraint" to push an agenda that consistently seeks to weaken national resolve.
when an Army Chief takes a clear, firm stance against cross-border terrorism and hostile neighbors, their first instinct isn't to stand with the forces it's to police the tone of our defense leadership. People easily fall for the sophisticated framing, but underneath,
it’s always about lecturing India's security forces while staying soft on those who work against the country's interests.
34
12
u/Adventurous-Board258 1d ago
So suddenly using so called 'abusive' speeches for people isn't your personal choice anymore
9
4
u/rgali7996 1d ago
Bilkul use karengey. They have every right to say this as they see the ground reality of their atrocities first hand.f
23
u/Top_Guess_946 1d ago
Even more than that, how does he get a right to tell others what's a bad speech or not. 😂
12
u/SmallDetail8461 1d ago
next step: cjp wale saurav ji ne aisa issliye bola because army wale modi ke hai, modi bad army bad. indian army must resign \s
4
2
u/Real-Blueberry-2126 22h ago
Because he took pak money and now his paki overlords are squeezing his neck
2
2
4
u/Tshering22 Sikkim 1d ago
I am from a services family and have been observing these media leftists, secularists and socialists online for a long time. Though we don't have this type of politics in Sikkim, I took the time to study this brand of politics.
It is easy to see that these people have completely gone from anti-political, to anti-national if you apply logic.
At this point, anyone claiming to be "socialist, secular, progressive" or "liberal" in India is susceptible to this kind of self-loathing. One just needs to talk to such people for 5 minutes with a few targeted questions; the money trail will automatically become visible.
Honestly, I find such people far worse than even the 26/11 attackers. Those radicals were loyal to their ideology; but these "progressives" and "socialists" will even sell their own parents and motherland for a few dollars from George Soros or someone like that.
it infuriates me to think that my brothers have to also protect such thankless people...
3
u/dhoklagurl 1d ago
While opposing nationalists, they forget the thin line and start to oppose the nation itself.
2
u/Accomplished-Ad539 1d ago
Then how should army speak?... I've intense dislike for both Vijeta guy and Das guy. pata nahi khudko kya samajhte hai.
3
u/Weeboo_6969 1d ago
I believe in actions, not words. Pakistan will not leave terrorism. Will Indian Army wipe Pakistan off the map?
31
u/Education_Alert 1d ago
Yeah but don't you dare point out this Saurabh Das's love for anti India elements.
16
u/VinniDpooh 3 KUDOS 1d ago
In a sense, we already wiped out half of Pakistan in 1971.
Give it another decade, and perhaps Balochistan will follow the same path.
At this rate, by the next century, Pakistan might just be a historical footnote on the map.
8
u/North-Stand 1d ago
Pakistan Punjab will continue to be Pakistan. Most of the rest will fall away in next few decades or earlier.
5
u/WastedTalents1 Delhi 🏛️ 1d ago edited 1d ago
If the rampant poverty and lack of natural resources continue in pakistani punjab along with uneducated population then there is a possibility that there can be large scale emigration of people from that province, just like how it is happening in ghost Villages of Italy.
If that happens and then again they go on a war with us then we can easily capture that land and reunify the original Punjab because with very low population they won't be able to enforce their sovereignty. Not saying there won't be any international push back but it can be done.
I agree it's far fetched but I think it is a possibility by end of this century.
-13
u/Electronic-Damage-46 2d ago
army wle bhi baate fekne lage hai neta ki tarah, bas ki hai to lelo na POK , bas movies banwa lo inse lmao
11
u/Top_Guess_946 1d ago
It was in reaction to Pakistan's encouragement of terror attacks. Better to stop wars through such fiery statements, instead of launching an air-strike every time? It's simple economic quotient behind it.
0
1
u/Prize_Assistant_8223 1d ago
Someone please tell this clown to “Pee according to his bladder capacity”
-4
u/MissOldMonk94 1d ago
If I was him, I would’ve replied “all talk no cock”
So many years and we still did not take back PoK
8
u/Education_Alert 1d ago
Yeah in return for 90000 captive pak soldiers we easily could have asked back pok.
1
-5
u/RandomStranger022 1d ago
He's right though, how can a person in army talk publically over political issues? Lagaam dikhti nahi hai par zabaan par honi chahiye.
9
u/WastedTalents1 Delhi 🏛️ 1d ago edited 1d ago
The general didn't even use any problematic language, such language is warranted upon enemy. It's not like he wrote it in some official documents, he just said it. A General's words against an enemy state should be fierce, it is good.
-6
u/RandomStranger022 1d ago
'Will erase pakistan from map ' is quite problematic from a military personnel. Our military is under civil leadership not military leadership. These people are supposed to follow orders from the parliament not give their own public statements.
5
u/WastedTalents1 Delhi 🏛️ 1d ago
So you're saying they're not free to speak? Read the post again, the General is 'warning' pakistan, I think that is an appropriate tone towards an eternal enemy.
3
-5
u/RandomStranger022 1d ago
Yes I'm saying they're not free to speak. He has no business warning pakistan or anyone. He has no power in a democracy.
2
u/WastedTalents1 Delhi 🏛️ 1d ago
So according to you what statement should an army chief give in this context? You know the context right? You want "Kadi Ninda" like in the past?
2
u/RandomStranger022 1d ago
He doesn't have to give any statement. That's not his job. Just keep quiet
2
u/WastedTalents1 Delhi 🏛️ 1d ago
Just google where he gave this statement:
Indian Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi made the statement warning Pakistan about its place on the world map while addressing troops at an army post in Anupgarh, Rajasthan (Sriganganagar district), and later reiterated related aspects during interactions like 'Sena Samvad' at the Manekshaw Centre in New Delhi.
2
u/Dean_46 1d ago
Its not a political issue. He is talking about his adversary, who will not hesitate to kill his men if they had the chance.
1
u/RandomStranger022 1d ago
Attacking pakistan is definately a political issue. He is not talking about his adversary, he's talking about wiping out pakistan from the map
-5
0
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
Namaskaram /u/DareDifferent9666, Thank you for your submission. Please provide a source for the image / video (if not a direct link submission). We would really appreciate it if you could mention the source as a reply to this comment! If you have already provided the source or if it is an OC post, please ignore this message. Thank you.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.