Afghanistan's finest hour.

McArmalite

January 1842. The massacre of Elphinstone's army was a victory of Afghan forces, led by Akbar Khan, over a british force, led by William Elphinstone, in January 1842. The fate of the British forces in Afghanistan was due to the collapse of morale and military efficiency.

The beginning of the end came on 6th January 1842 when the british garrison following a purported agreement with the Ameers guaranteeing safe conduct to India, marched out of the cantonments and began the terrible journey to the Khyber Pass and on to India. The column was attacked from the moment it left the Kabul cantonments.

The british army managed to march 6 miles on the first day. The night was spent without tents or cover, many troops and camp followers dying of cold.

The next day the march continued, Brigadier Shelton, after his ineffectiveness as Elphinstone’s deputy, showing his worth leading the counter attacks of the rearguard to cover the main body.

At Bootkhak Akbar Khan arrived claiming he had been deputed to ensure the army completed its journey without further harassment. He insisted that the column halt and camp, extorting a large sum of money and insisting that further officers be given up as hostages. One of the conditions negotiated with the Ameers was that the British abandon Kandahar and Jellalabad. Akbar Khan required the hostages to ensure Brigadier Sale left Jellalabad and withdrew to India.

The next day found the force so debilitated by the freezing night that few of the soldiers were fit for duty. The column struggled into the narrow five mile long Khoord Cabul pass to be fired on for its whole length by the tribesmen posted on the heights on each side. The rearguard was found by the 44th Regiment who fought to keep the tribesmen at bay. 3,000 casualties were left in the gorge.

On 9th January 1842 Akbar Khan required further hostages in the form of the remaining married officers with their families. For the next two days the column pushed through the passes and fought off the incessant attacks of the tribesmen.

On the evening of 11th January 1842 Akbar Khan compelled General Elphinstone and Brigadier Shelton to surrender as hostages, leaving the command to Brigadier Anquetil. The troops reached the Jugdulluk crest to find the road blocked by a thorn abattis manned by Ghilzai tribesmen. A desperate attack was mounted, the horse artillery driving their remaining guns at the abattis, but few managed to pass this fatal obstruction.

The final stand took place at Gandamak on the morning of 13th January 1842 in the snow. 20 officers and 45 soldiers, mostly of the 44th Foot, found themselves surrounded on a hillock. Then the sniping began followed a series of rushes. Captain Souter wrapped the colours of the regiment around his body and was dragged into captivity with two or three soldiers. The remainder were shot or cut down. Only 6 mounted officers escaped. Of these 5 were killed along the road.

On the afternoon of 13th January 1842 the british troops in Jellalabad, watching for their comrades of the Kabul garrison, saw a single figure ride up to the town walls. It was Dr Brydon, the sole survivor of the column.

kreuzberger

as Nelson once candidly remarked " Ha Ha !!"

Fratton Fred

If you are going to quote passages from wikipedia, then surely you should also provide the link.

Surely you should also add back in the some of the kay facts as well, such as the fact that only a quarter of those massacred were actually armed personnel, the rest were army followers, cooks maids etc including a large number of women and children.

The British only provided one batalion, the remainder of the troops were Indian. To an extent, the British wives were lucky in that they were taken hostage because they would attract a ransom. The wives of the Indian personnel were not so lucky, they were massacred along with their husbands and children

Glad you two saddos think this is funny, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Morlar

Not really seeing the funny side to this one either.

McArmalite

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you are going to quote passages from wikipedia, then surely you should also provide the link.

Surely you should also add back in the some of the kay facts as well, such as the fact that only a quarter of those massacred were actually armed personnel, the rest were army followers, cooks maids etc including a large number of women and children.

The British only provided one batalion, the remainder of the troops were Indian. To an extent, the British wives were lucky in that they were taken hostage because they would attract a ransom. The wives of the Indian personnel were not so lucky, they were massacred along with their husbands and children

Glad you two saddos think this is funny, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

If the british had perpetrated it you'd be calling it a wonderful british victory wouldn't you. Far from been the benign, benevolent charity you like to pretend the british empire was, it was propably one of the worst tryanny's inflicted on the human race. You even succeded in something the Nazi's falied to do, wiping out a whole race of people - the Tasmanian Aborigines.

Quis Separabit

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you are going to quote passages from wikipedia, then surely you should also provide the link.

Surely you should also add back in the some of the kay facts as well, such as the fact that only a quarter of those massacred were actually armed personnel, the rest were army followers, cooks maids etc including a large number of women and children.

The British only provided one batalion, the remainder of the troops were Indian. To an extent, the British wives were lucky in that they were taken hostage because they would attract a ransom. The wives of the Indian personnel were not so lucky, they were massacred along with their husbands and children

Glad you two saddos think this is funny, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Most likely because hes left out the bits that mention acts of heroism.

McArmalite

Quis Separabit wrote: »

Most likely because hes left out the bits that mention acts of heroism.

Quis Separabit - the motto of the UDA, what are you mouthing about true blue billyboy.

SpitfireIV

McArmalite wrote: »

If the british had perpetrated it you'd be calling it a wonderful british victory wouldn't you. Far from been the benign, benevolent charity you like to pretend the british empire was, it was propably one of the worst tryanny's inflicted on the human race. You even succeded in something the Nazi's falied to do, wiping out a whole race of people - the Tasmanian Aborigines.

What satisfaction are you getting from this? Serious question, I mean, hell, we all know the 'Brits were bad', but why must you keep dragging the topic up? In my view you have a twisted view of history, you cant accept the facts and look at things from both sides, you have a massive grudge and a rather over sized chip on your shoulder.

The line 'this is a history forum where we discuss historic topics' doesnt wash here because your OP was just an extract with no questions asked, no obvious interest from you, just a blatant and obvious 'haha, the Brits got there asses kicked', thats a sad attitude and I am getting fed up of it in here, you say that your reason for constantly posting here is to counter the posts of 'brits' 'unionists' 'west brits' or whatever you call them that were supposedly hijacking all the threads, but I can tell you this forum was far more civalised and mature before you arrived.

Give it over, its getting boring.

Mods: Any chance that some new guidelines can be drawn up to cut out this crap? Or create a sub forum along the lines of 'Brit Bashing'? (joke)

McArmalite

CroppyBoy1798 wrote: »

What satisfaction are you getting from this? Serious question, I mean, hell, we all know the 'Brits were bad', but why must you keep dragging the topic up? In my view you have a twisted view of history, you cant accept the facts and look at things from both sides, you have a massive grudge and a rather over sized chip on your shoulder.

The line 'this is a history forum where we discuss historic topics' doesnt wash here because your OP was just an extract with no questions asked, no obvious interest from you, just a blatant and obvious 'haha, the Brits got there asses kicked', thats a sad attitude and I am getting fed up of it in here, you say that your reason for constantly posting here is to counter the posts of 'brits' 'unionists' 'west brits' or whatever you call them that were supposedly hijacking all the threads, but I can tell you this forum was far more civalised and mature before you arrived.

Give it over, its getting boring.

Mods: Any chance that some new guidelines can be drawn up to cut out this crap? Or create a sub forum along the lines of 'Brit Bashing'? (joke)

Well I must admit I have been going a little hard on them these days, but if people insultingly insisit the british empire was a benign, benevloent sort of charity, I do insist in debunking that offensive attitude. Also, I have started discussions on Dev's economic policy's, if their was Roman presence in Ireland, the Choctaw contribution to the famine victims, the Vikings in Ireland, The Greatest General in history, the Worst General in history and so on. Just because I post a 'brits were bad' thread now and again, I don't see why you have to try and jump down my throat.

Our own country is still suffering the effects of this tryannical ideology - partition. The violence of britian may not affect you or for that matter do you care less about it so long as it's someone else who has to live with the consequences of it, I'm alright Jack down in cosy Carlow. I make no apologies for bringing attention to the unsavoury aspects of the british state thru history. When you consider the amount of crap that is put out by Kevin Meyers, Ruth Dudley West brit ( Edwards ) Eoghan Harris and co. a poster like me should be welcomed as putting foward a counter view. BTW, yesterday I received a pm congratulating me on the providing information on the James Connolly's birthplace thread. Not everyone thinks like you around here.

" you cant accept the facts and look at things from both sides ". Oh that's something coming from you. I've seen in discussions on the troubles how you look at things from both sides....i.e. the british Tommy's are wonderful chaps and the IRA are baby eaters sort of thing.

" this forum was far more civalised and mature before you arrived.
". You've got to be kidding pal. And when a certain person was hijacking threads with "the IRA this, the IRA that, the IRA the other" on any discussion critical of britian - I didn't see you coming on critising them, agreeing with them in general was more like it. Anyway, if my posts are boring you - don't read them .

kreuzberger

If i remember correctly one of our finest national poets Thomas Davis wrote a poem paying tirbute to Akbar Khan at the time of his stirring victory that was very popular in Ireland at the time . saw it posted somewhere a few years ago but cant remember where and google is no help .

Shutuplaura

Anyone fancy a bit of Kipling?

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

The good docter was left alive becasue the Afghans assumed he was an important noble becasue of the richly embroidered waistcoat he wore. I'm not sure why but that was seen as reason to spare him. It was the regimental colours he wrapped about himself. Talk about dumb luck.

Quis Separabit

McArmalite wrote: »

Quis Separabit - the motto of the UDA, what are you mouthing about true blue billyboy.

The motto of the Irish Guards since 1905.

McArmalite

I seee from Erin Go Brath's posting yesterday regarding your statement and the famine -

CroppyBoy1798 wrote: »

Yeah that map is a well balanced one alright, for instance:

"Escorting food shipments thru Royal and Grand Canals to Dublin for export; 17th 32nd, 45th, 66th, 13th Dragoons (whence the term goons)"

Eh, no.....thats not why Dragoons as so called.


"Carbine toting British Constabularly and Militia"

.....funny.

I personally dont like that site, its kicking up a lot of resentment and hatred for an event which is long in the past...

"Irishmen and Irishwomen!
Read this site and weep. Weep for the agonies and deaths of your people at the hands of genocidists. The authorities who imposed the curriculum, the teachers and professors who funneled it into you, have carefully kept you uninformed as to which British regiment, or that any regiment, murdered your people. Until now, that information was kept from you. You had no access to it. You do now - you read it on your computer screen! Commit the regiment's name to memory.

Never, ever, forget it!
Learn its British HQ town. As no Jewish person would ever refer to the "Jewish Oxygen Famine of 1939 - 1945", so no Irish person ought ever refer to the Irish Holocaust as a famine."

What are we supposed to do? Track down the relatives of British soldiers during the famine and kill them or something??

Nuff said.....

" I personally dont like that site, its kicking up a lot of resentment and hatred for an event which is long in the past.........What are we supposed to do? Track down the relatives of British soldiers during the famine and kill them or something??.....Nuff said.....

And then this is the fella who lectures about " balance " and " a twisted view of history" :rolleyes:. So, unless we look on britian's atrocites and war crimes with blinkers like you, it's unfair and unbalanced.

As Erin Go Brath says "Your slavish attitude towards our former colonial masters is an embarassement. ". 1000%. Don't lecture me, like I said - when a certain person was hijacking threads denegrating and trivalising british injustices inflicted on this country - I didn't see you coming on critising them, agreeing with them in general was more like it."

McArmalite

Quis Separabit wrote: »

The motto of the Irish Guards since 1905.

The Irish Guards - offical british army. The UDA - unoffical british army.

Off topic but anyway, since the UDA's motto has been brought into the discussion. The loyalist paramilitary Ulster Defence Association was formed in 1971 from various vigilante loyalist gangs and was legal until 1992. I remember a controversy in the early 70's when the head of the brits in the occupied counties (cann't think of his name) was asked if membership of the UDA and the british army Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR) was incompatible. He stated " No, it wasn't " and refused to withdraw his remarks over the next few days. Says it all about the brits neutrality and 'peacekeeping' doesn't it.

Fratton Fred

Shutuplaura wrote: »

Anyone fancy a bit of Kipling?

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

The good docter was left alive becasue the Afghans assumed he was an important noble becasue of the richly embroidered waistcoat he wore. I'm not sure why but that was seen as reason to spare him. It was the regimental colours he wrapped about himself. Talk about dumb luck.

Noblemen would attract a ransom so were worth more alive than dead.

kreuzberger

Morlar wrote: »

Not really seeing the funny side to this one either.

http://www.friendsreincarnated.com/images/hawtrey.jpg