Nehru wanted to scrap Army: Former General

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
Nehru wanted to scrap Army: Former General


Lahore: The Kashmir war saved the Indian Army from being scrapped. Sounds strange, but a biography of Major General A A 'Jick' Rudra of the Indian Army by Major General D K 'Monty' Palit claims so.
According to the book - General Rudra: His service in three Armies and two World Wars - Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru blew his top when Lt General Sir Robert Lockhart, the first commander-in-chief of India took a strategic plan for a Government directive on defence policy.
"Shortly after Independence, General Lockhart as the Army chief took a strategic plan to the prime minister, asking for a Government directive on the defence policy. He came back to Jick's office shell-shocked," a newspaper quotes the book as saying.
"When asked what happened, he replied, 'The PM took one look at my paper and blew his top. Rubbish! Total rubbish! We don't need a defence plan. Our policy is ahimsa (non-violence). We foresee no military threats. Scrap the army! The police are good enough to meet our security needs'," the newspaper further quotes the book.
According to the book, Jick believed the Kashmir war saved the Indian Army.
"General Sir Douglas Gracie had been appointed commander-in-chief of the Pakistan Army and he and General Lockhart daily exchanged information about refugees traversing Punjab in both directions," the newspaper report says.
"One day in late October 1947, Gracie mentioned that he had had reports of tribesmen massing in the area of Attock-Rawalpindi. Both men knew that cross-border raids from Pakistan had been mounted against Poonch. Kashmir was not a part of the dominion of India and Lockhart felt that the tribesmen posed no threat to India. He did not pass on the information to the ministry or general staff," the report further said.
"When confronted by Nehru three months later, he admitted this and added that he may have been remiss. Nehru turned to him and asked the general if his sympathies were with Pakistan?"
"Aghast, Lockhart replied, 'Mr prime minister if you have to ask me that question, I have no business being the commander-in-chief of your forces. I know that there is a boat leaving Bombay in a few days, carrying British officers and their families to England. I shall be on it'," it added.
According to the biography, General Lockhart called up his Military Secretary Jick Rudra the next day, January 26 1948, and suggested he start looking around for a successor since he had resigned from his post.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
After gaining promise of Independence a meeting was organized to select the first General of the Indian Army. Jawahar Lal Nehru was heading that meeting.



Leaders and Army officers were discussing to whom this responsibility should be given.



In between the discussion Nehru said, "I think we should appoint a British officer as a General of Indian Army as we don't have enough experience to lead the same."



Everybody supported Nehru because if the PM was suggesting something, how can they not agree?



But one of the army officers abruptly said, "I have a point, sir."



Nehru said, "Yes, gentleman. You are free to speak."



He said, "You see, sir, we don't have enough experience to lead a nation too, so shouldn't we appoint a British person as first PM of India?"



The meeting hall suddenly went quiet.



Then, Nehru said, "Are you ready to be the first General of Indian Army?"



He got a golden chance to accept the offer but he refused the same and said, "Sir, we have a very talented army officer, my senior, Lt Gen Cariappa, who is the most deserving among us."



The army officer who raised his voice against the PM was Lt General Nathu Singh Rathore, the 1st Lt General of the Indian Army.
http://www.mirroroftomorrow.org/blog/_archives/2010/10/1/4639406.html
 

maomao

Veteran Hunter of Maleecha
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
5,029
Likes
8,259
Country flag
Yeah, I have read these reports about Nehru and his dumb antics, some kangaroos say he was a visionary, however reality is too away from common knowledge about this self-hating moron, if it wasn't for Sri Vallabh Bhai Patel and Dr Rajender Prasad, the India we know today would have ceased to exist due to our nation's beloved Chachaji.
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,127
Likes
20,220
Country flag
All the more proof that Nehru was an up-the-arse overly self-rightous idiot who was out of tune with the world order. He may have been a good freedom fighter, but a horrible wielder and administrator of that freedom.
 

S.A.T.A

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
2,569
Likes
1,542
Pt Nehru Having lived under the shadow of Gandhiji for the better part of his political career sought desperately to prove himself to be his worthy successor.The weight of history and legacy was so daunting, so much so Nehru often failed to appreciate the fact that Gandhiji was leading the nation in a struggle for Independence, where as he was leading an independent nation.Pt Nehru best represents the fact why Plato's 'Philosopher King' was inherently flawed despite its obvious charm.
 

ejazr

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,523
Likes
1,385
You can't have an opinion on this correctly if you don't look at the whole picture. Making comments like these is like picking and choosing to prove a particular pov. The Indian Army was basically a British creation and since India had recently gained its independance, the leaders of Indpendant India were legitimately concerned how the then British Indian Army would behave.

The main concern with deciding the defence policy directive was that the Indian army officials would be more inclined to work with colonial powers like Britian and France and support their interests. While Nehru on the otherhand wanted to be the leader of the 3rd world and champion the cause of colonised nations in Asia and Africa. Besides the enormous task of nation building that had to be done to lift people out of poverty.

But the Kashmir war was enough to bring Nehru back to reality and post Kashmir war, Nehru stood in favor of the army. This is the whole picture. Ofcourse every person has their faults, and Nehruvian foreign policy is rightly criticised for being to idealistic/elitist and not realpolitik enough. But without Nehru to put the groundwork of a multi-cultural, multi-linguistic and secular state, the India we know today would not exist.
 

maomao

Veteran Hunter of Maleecha
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
5,029
Likes
8,259
Country flag
Nehru was a paranoid, insecure and short-tempered elitist, plus he never thought of country first, above all he was a lap dog of Britishers, there is not even an ounce of doubt in that. The myth of Nehru being a pragmatic leader has been trashed time and again though in a subtle manner, and the reasons are obviously known to us.

Read on:

Shashi Tharoor, minister of state for external affairs, got it both right and wrong on Jawaharlal Nehru because he forgot a basic piece of wisdom: you don't fight foundational myths.

Myth-busting is for scholars, authors and retired politicians, whose ranks Tharoor may soon be forced to join given his controversial twittermania. It's not for active politicians who want to leave their mark on history.

His remarks on Nehru —- to the effect that he followed a wishy-washy foreign policy driven by Gandhian morality — are a case in point. If you are a Congressman, you have to believe in the Nehru myth.

The Nehru myth states, inter alia, that modern India was entirely hiscreation (only slightly true), that he was entirely secular and democratic (not always), that the Nehru family is the only one that has the whole of India's interests at heart (absolutely untrue), that non-alignment was a wonderful thing, and so on.

If you are part of a dynastic party, you cannot survive by challenging the Nehru myth. If you do, you challenge the very basis for its existence.

No Nehru myth, no dynasty. This is why the Congress cannot put any leader — Sardar Patel, Ambedkar, Jinnah, Rajagopalachari or Rajendra Prasad — on the same pedestal as Nehru despite the fact that they all contributed much to the making of India.

Besides, Nehru himself was no perennial success icon. His foreign policy blunders culminated in the humiliation of 1962. His economic policies were equally flawed, as Nehru believed in the Soviet model with minor roles for the private sector.

His daughter initially compounded his economic follies, but after the 1980s she started changing course. It took a bankruptcy in 1991 to finally abandon Nehruvian socialism.

The reason why Nehru made colossal blunders was simple: he was vain and hence sycophants could take him for a ride. This is why he persisted with VK Krishna Menon long after events proved him to be a liability; Chinese leader Zhou Enlai pulled wool over his eyes by pretending to be a novice in international affairs.

Nehru held forth about his views on the world believing Zhou to be a genuine admirer when the latter was actually playing to his ego and neutralising him on Tibet.

In course of time, the Nehru myth has been extended to the whole family, from Indira Gandhi to Rajiv to Sonia and now Rahul and Priyanka.

Thus, Indira is the social messiah (bank nationalisation, garibi hatao), Rajiv Gandhi is the moderniser and reformer (though Narasimha Rao actually did more in reality), and Rahul the new youth icon and emancipator. You question these myths at your own peril. Tharoor got a rap on the knuckles only for this.

Without myths there would be no institutions, for myths are the glue that holds disparate elements together. Whether it is a religion or a corporation, myths are essential and beyond reality.

Management writers Jim Collins and Jerry Porras (Built to Last) discovered that successful companies that have survived for over 100 years tended to have cult-like cultures that you could not question. People who questioned the corporate myths ("we are a people-oriented organisation") were ejected fast. You can't be in Wal-Mart and not participate in the company's theme song. You can't be in HP without kowtowing to the HP Way.

In Pakistan, they have a Jinnah myth — he was never a pious Muslim, but given his role in the creation of the state, you can't mention it. In India, Jinnah has been demonised (often for good reason), but a rational reassessment is not possible either by the Congress (which believes in the Nehru myth) or the BJP (which has to follow the RSS, which believes in Akhand Bharat, where Jinnah has been given the villain's role).

It doesn't matter that Partition has actually created a huge Hindu majority India, of the kind that the RSS could not have dreamed of in a united India. But myths do not need to have a rational basis.

It's the same with the major organised religions. You can't be a Christian without believing in virgin birth and resurrection, never mind that these myths are far removed from the message of Jesus Christ and invented much later.

You can't be Muslim without believing that before the prophet arrived it was all jahiliya — the age of ignorance — even though common sense tells us humanity always had its dark and bright spots in all ages. Hindus have too many myths to count, but the point is that a thought gets institutionalised only with the help of myths.

Myths work best when you pay lip service to them, but don't get hemmed in. If Tharoor wants to change Nehruvian ideas, the best way is to lionise Nehruism and then dump his ideas in practice. This is what we have done with Gandhi. So why not Nehru?

http://www.dnaindia.com/opinion/column_nehru-and-other-myths_1334486
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
4,673
Likes
3,506
I always knew Nehru was a big $**** sell-off for India. No wonder the defence and territorial integrity of India has been gone to the dogs because he became our first PM rather than Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel--the Iron Man of India.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,133
Likes
23,720
You can't have an opinion on this correctly if you don't look at the whole picture. Making comments like these is like picking and choosing to prove a particular pov. The Indian Army was basically a British creation and since India had recently gained its independance, the leaders of Indpendant India were legitimately concerned how the then British Indian Army would behave.
So did Paul Bremer think about the Iraqi Army.

What has his demobilising of the Iraqi Army led to?

Interestingly, those very demobbed chaps are today forming a large share of the Iraqi Army!

Who created the Kashmir issue with Pakistan hanging like an Albatross around our neck?

Who gave away Aksai Chin where not a blade of grass grew?

Who kept the Army as a mere Republic Day Parade ceremonial tool and nothing beyond what was handed over fro, the colonial days?

Who produced coffee machines in the Ordnance Depot?

One cannot rule a country on mere dreams and merely high morals! it is a fine trait, but not quite practical in a world where the other leaders of other countries are scoundrels!
 
Last edited:

panduranghari

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
1,790
Likes
1,249
All the more proof that Nehru was an up-the-arse overly self-rightous idiot who was out of tune with the world order. He may have been a good freedom fighter, but a horrible wielder and administrator of that freedom.
Wasn't he sleeping around with Edwina Mountbatten? Didn't he die from Heart manifestation of tertiary syphilis?
 

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,158
Likes
12,154
It's true, that if a Gori easily available for s.e.x keeps you out of the mind...
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,133
Likes
23,720
Nehru's legacy lives.

The Ministers and Bureaucracy believes in it totally!

God Blesss the Blind!

They have already sold Tibet and Kashmir and they have ensured that there is no jointmanship either.

See the thread of the Govt scuttling VK Singh's plan.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,571
Did any British officers and NCOs serve in IA after independence?
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,742
Well whats new in this news... Dint we all know that he was a sickfu(k womanizer who knew nothing about our nation:innocent::innocent:.... Now this gandhi family is proving that they are of Nehruvian decent...:frusty::frusty::frusty:
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,133
Likes
23,720
Did any British officers and NCOs serve in IA after independence?
Some did.


Lt Gen Walter David Alexander Lentaigne was the Commandant Indian Staff College.till 1955.



Due to a shortage of experienced officers, several hundred British officers remained in Pakistan on contract until the early 1950s. From 1947 to 1948, soon after the Partition of India and of the Indian Army, the two new armies fought each other in the First Kashmir War.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
24,530
Likes
20,964
Country flag
If nehru really proposed this year it would have been the right time for a military coup.
It may have been better than the disasters nehru brought to the nation. Kashmir,Tibet,
Article 370,aksai chin,Tibet,UNSC rejection, 1962,maoists. Most of the military spending
Today is from a direct result of a disaster that nehru created.
 

Sam2012

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
743
Likes
205
Irony isisn't it the same dumb ass told army to overthrow chinese in 1962, where the ahimsa gone that time? why were the police not good enough in 1962? . He and his joker family is a curse to whole country

Because of their family India is facing kashmir issue , 1962 debacle war with china , 1971 war & 1980'ssss LTTE operation poomalai etc

this bloody family has changed the whole fortune of our country

Now UPA-1 & UPA-2 no need war at all corruption at pick , HIs whole decendends has to be hanged now after kasab if INDIA has to servive swine family
 

lcatejas

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Messages
710
Likes
256
If nehru really proposed this year it would have been the right time for a military coup.
It may have been better than the disasters nehru brought to the nation. Kashmir,Tibet,
Article 370,aksai chin,Tibet,UNSC rejection, 1962,maoists. Most of the military spending
Today is from a direct result of a disaster that nehru created.
You forgot to mention Sonia G and her UPA family
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top