Gurkhas owe a lot to British

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,063
Navan, Ireland
Unfortunately, you seem too emotionally invested for me to take you seriously. Where did I claim that the British did not view them as good soldier material? I merely said that they were not special. Don't misrepresent me again.
Sorry not in the slightest bit emotional and I doubt that's the reason you don't take me seriously rather that I have the temerity to hold a contrary view to yours.

You have continually claimed they were held in low regard and inferior to other soldiers so no I don't think I am misrepresenting you position.


Please show me this hallowed "fighting record'. I can show you the fighting record of many such groups. And I highly doubt the records of the post-1857 period would be highly reliable considering the prevalence of the debunked "martial race" theory.
Sorry is that a serious comment? so that you can not claim you are being miss-represented by me you are actually claiming that the Gurkha do not have a 'hallowed' or very good fighting record?

Do a Google search and you will find plenty of examples.




Yes it has. It is you who has yet to post a single source.
There are very few sources on here just opinions and the only sources you have posted to support your opinions -- actually didn't say what you claimed they said!
 
  • Like
Reactions: World Focker

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,063
Navan, Ireland
What a weird misrepresentation of my post. Did I use the term "poor martial material" or anything akin to it? I merely said that they were unremarkable in relation to the variety of other recruits. Your repeated attempts to strawman me should stop.
I don't think I am mis-representing you at all and you are simply shifting your position as it makes little sense. But if we continue with your wording above. If the British them 'unremarkable' and held them in such little regard why on earth recruit them?



And how does "honesty and loyalty" (more like submissiveness), relate to their supposed "martial ability".
Honestly and Loyalty would be (and always have been) very highly valued characteristic in soldiers especially mercenaries.
That its 'submissiveness' merely reflects your bias-- would that apply to the 'Indian' soldiers who served in the BIA in the millions?



Of course it does my little friend!;)
No it doesn't.

That's your perceived contention.
And I think its the correct one.
 

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,063
Navan, Ireland
What a weird misrepresentation of my post. Did I use the term "poor martial material" or anything akin to it? I merely said that they were unremarkable in relation to the variety of other recruits. Your repeated attempts to strawman me should stop.
I don't think I am mis-representing you at all and you are simply shifting your position as it makes little sense. But if we continue with your wording above. If the British them 'unremarkable' and held them in such little regard why on earth recruit them?



And how does "honesty and loyalty" (more like submissiveness), relate to their supposed "martial ability".
Honestly and Loyalty would be (and always have been) very highly valued characteristic in soldiers especially mercenaries.
That its 'submissiveness' merely reflects your bias-- would that apply to the 'Indian' soldiers who served in the BIA in the millions?



Of course it does my little friend!;)
No it doesn't.

That's your perceived contention.
And I think its the correct one.
 

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,063
Navan, Ireland
Sorry double post.


 

Mangekyou

Ad Honorem
Jan 2010
7,963
UK
They caused a lot of problems for the British during the Anglo-Nepalese war, so their martial prowess already existed. It's a mutual benefit. We owe them just as much for the service as they get from us fiscally.
 

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,063
Navan, Ireland
I've only seen the OP so far, but its the other way round. We owe the Ghurkas a huge debt and we should never forget it.

The Ghurkas gave us a really hard time back in colonial days, which is why, once India was part of the Empire, they were eventually subsumed into the army.

Since then they have distinguished themselves time and again. They are one of our crack units and the shameful way in which successive British governments have treated Gurkha veterans is an absolute national disgrace. As is so often the case nowadays, our leaders have shown themselves to be moral pygmies.

It is perhaps no surprise that many Ghurkas now prefer to join the Indian Army's Ghurka regiments rather then ours.
It should be remembered that the pay of British Gurkhas was linked to that of Indian army regiments so they could not be paid the same as British soldiers-- I believe they are now paid the same -- and its hardy surprising that Indian army units are 'preferred' (not sure they are) as Geography means that they can visit home more effectively. The British recruit about 200 or so Gurkhas each year and they have something like 7,000 applications.
 
Jul 2014
1,645
world
It should be remembered that the pay of British Gurkhas was linked to that of Indian army regiments so they could not be paid the same as British soldiers-- I believe they are now paid the same -- and its hardy surprising that Indian army units are 'preferred' (not sure they are) as Geography means that they can visit home more effectively. The British recruit about 200 or so Gurkhas each year and they have something like 7,000 applications.
The British Gurkha units are the most prefered choice followed by Singapore (police?) and than Indian Gurkha regiments and many forces. The Nepali army is the lowest prefered choice. The British gurkhas after post 1947 were paid much better than their Indian counterparts even if the pay was not equal to the native British recruits. I have a Gurung friend in British Gurkhas and they are a tough lot.

Intresting tidbit : The Gurkha soldiers are not called as Gurkhalis by the Nepalese. They are known as "Lahure" meaning those from Lahore because many Gurkhas were based in Lahore,Pakistan I guess.
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,985
India
The British Gurkha units are the most prefered choice followed by Singapore (police?) and than Indian Gurkha regiments and many forces. The Nepali army is the lowest prefered choice. The British gurkhas after post 1947 were paid much better than their Indian counterparts even if the pay was not equal to the native British recruits. I have a Gurung friend in British Gurkhas and they are a tough lot.

Intresting tidbit : The Gurkha soldiers are not called as Gurkhalis by the Nepalese. They are known as "Lahure" meaning those from Lahore because many Gurkhas were based in Lahore,Pakistan I guess.
Mountain people are very good when comes to combat. Apart from Gurkhas there are others, like Nagas are too well known for their valour or Ladakhis who are well adapted to high altitude combat.
 

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,063
Navan, Ireland
The British Gurkha units are the most prefered choice followed by Singapore (police?) and than Indian Gurkha regiments and many forces. The Nepali army is the lowest prefered choice. The British gurkhas after post 1947 were paid much better than their Indian counterparts even if the pay was not equal to the native British recruits. I have a Gurung friend in British Gurkhas and they are a tough lot.
......................................
Looking around I'd have to agree most especially as now they get equal pay with British troops and an opportunity to get a pension and even settle in the UK.

Reading some newspaper reports there is now dubious 'schools' training recruits for selection, such is the demand.

I also note that the British are expanding the brigade of Gurkhas.

I however reject that any race is somehow better soldiers than another simply due to genetics. I would expect that if you have 7000 eager applicants from any 'race' and take only 200 you will have a fine unit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Olleus
Jul 2014
1,645
world
I however reject that any race is somehow better soldiers than another simply due to genetics. I would expect that if you have 7000 eager applicants from any 'race' and take only 200 you will have a fine unit.
I totally agree. The reason that Gurkhas were loyal and steadfast were not becasue of some genetics or that they were born soldiers.

Nepalese had/has a hard life especially those who live in mountanous rural areas. So they appreciate good things when they see it and British treated them much better than the native Rana regime. British gave them pension (unheard of before) and did not ask for bribes. The pension were also delivered to their home villages. The children were provided rudimentary schooling. The pension and salary made Tamang and Rai ethnic group independent of the Kathmandu elites. The Gurungs became the richest ethnicty in Pokhara. Magars also benefited. The hill tribes became a source for soldiers for the British and British became a source for income and honour for the hill tribes. Both sides benifited.