Gujarat was better when it was more culturally linked with Rajasthan. Saurasthra> main Gujarat. Gandhi finished the castration job. Interestingly, despite low army contribution- villages can be pretty violent and territorial disputes can definitely get ugly. Communal riots are also not as uncommon as they should be. Though, historically these issues are much much better. Lack of alcohol and relatively limited gun culture also contributes.

Under Modi, more youths trying to join army. But recruitment is still really bad.

I mean compared to Indian Bengali, anything will be considered martial…

the indian bengali is an argumentative soul, where as the bangladeshi appears to be martial considering their coups etc.

thimmaiyya is a coorgi. the coorgees have given us two chiefs and may other ranks.

“ The battle over motives in history is one, that for the life of us, we could not understand. Was the desecration of temples, whether by Mahmud of Ghazni or Aurangzeb, driven by the motives of asserting political power or economic gain as secular historians want to assert or was it an act of religious bigotry? How does one even ascertain this? Would it make a difference? Would it make a moral difference if we said the demolition of Babari Masjid was politically motivated, not religiously motivated? Or as one of our history teachers used to say, he would be even more morally offended by temple desecration if it turned out it was done for mere opportunism rather than out of genuine conviction. It was a way of challenging the unexamined assumption that somehow a deed done under the sign of earthly functionality (power or riches) made it a less loathsome act than if it were done out of piety. At least the fanatic is not destroying lightly. He may be deluded, but he has not destroyed you for a trivial reason.“

The rise of Mehta ji inner-Hindu ?

Guess he is referring to Sam Manekshaw (??). But then they would be the last remnants of a powerful Indo-Iranian continuum. And fully relevant to the current discussion on Middle Age Kings fighting Islamic incursions….

Its Indian army after all, a Bengali even lead it once. So no surprise there…

Or perhaps you consider a typical Parsi quite Martial!

Well, stereotypes exist for a reason. Plus the Brits ruled us so long, because they did figure out the best.

Ironically, they were also the reason why martial theory was debunked as well. Provided fire arms and training to less-martial ethnicities, lead to the flattening of martial-ness of all ethnicities. Just because it became true post the British, does not mean it was true before that.