Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Second Anglo-Afghan War

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 199.82.243.102 (talk) at 10:57, 19 September 2021 (→Afghanistan Protectorate State). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

92nd Highlanders

They seem to be in the picture, and the war is in their honours, but they don't seem to be in the order of battle. 174.112.18.193 (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afghan victory?

Why an Afghan victory? Just asking, as it's in the box, but nothing I know (and nothing in the text), really supports such a one-sided summary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.146.90 (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Belligerent - 'Unite Kingdom'

The second and third Anglo-Afghan wars were fought between the Afghans and the British Empire - not the UK - all articles on the subject need correcting. Temperamental1 (talk) 11:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Captured British Soldiers

The British officer John Masters recorded in his autobiography that Afghan women in the North-West Frontier Province (1901–1955) of British India during the Second Anglo-Afghan War would castrate and urinate non-Muslim soldiers who were captured, like British and Sikhs. ; But this claim is incredible, because Pathans do not allow their women to look at their close relatives. How is it possible to let them urinate in others moths.Pathans urinated into prisoner's mouths. Captured British soldiers were spread out and fastened with restraints to the ground, then a stick, or a piece of wood was used to keep their mouth open to prevent swallowing. Pathan then squatted and urinated directly into the mouth of the man until he drowned in the urine, taking turns one at a time.

Not complete by far

Not a single word about the British duplicity, incompetence and brutality. No word of Auckland, Elphinstone, McNaughten, Burnes, Sale and a host of other British. No word of the Russians either, nor of their Polish unofficial envoy whose simple presence started the entire Anglo-Afghan disaster. This article is too brief for such a huge and important topic whose ramifications continue to this day. You could start by reading "The Return of the King" by William Dalrymple, and follow his key references.Historygypsy (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a page for the Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878-80), you're talking about the First Afghan War (1839-42) which is the one 'Return of the King' deals with. Of course, the second war was influenced by the first, but the Fist Afghan War page can be referenced for that history. Tybaltstone (talk) 22:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gladstone condemned the invasion on moral grounds and reversed it after winning the 1880 election.

From his Midlothian campaign: Remember the rights of the savage, as we call him. Remember that the happiness of his humble home, remember that the sanctity of life in the hill villages of Afghanistan, among the winter snows, is as inviolable in the eye of Almighty God, as can be your own. Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/williameg150999.html

The Wiki conveniently ignores this... it is a thoroughly jingoistic version of history.

Another point that needs recalling is that Roberts was able to easily march to Kandahar in 1880 because he was doing so to withdraw and return to India. The Amir sent emissaries to the tribes urging them not to create any problems for his exit! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.17.232.183 (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

British victory

Not an English victory by any means. The british just signed a treaty to stop Afghans from pestering them, that's a loss not a win. Akmal94 (talk) 16:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Masters Book

Cureel has come forward and stated that Master's book does not mention the 2nd Anglo-Afghan War, that the alleged incidents were not about the 2nd Anglo-Afghan war. That does not look like vandalism, it looks like an informed position. Masters was writing some decades after his experience near, not in, Afghanistan and otherwise wrote popular fiction. Unless there is a positive discussion about the exact location and time that Masters is writing about and a defence of this author as a credible source, I wish to remove discussion of his comments from this entry. Brunswicknic (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes

Multiple IP users that keeps making recent changes needs to discuss here - it is becoming an edit war. Eastfarthingan (talk) 15:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

protectorate or protected state?

protectorate or protected state?because wikipedia clearly differentiate between "protectorate" and "protected state". please change the war result imformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.211.22.22 (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong information

It should be "both sides claim victory" not "british victory" as both sides couldn't reach their objectives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:E08A:BD25:357C:3C8C (talk) 19:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please state your sources. Eastfarthingan (talk) 19:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Afganistan is a protected state of British and not a protectorate of British, there is difference between protectorate and protected state, The word protectorate is not appropriate as it refers to countries which were formally part of British empire, Afganistan was never formally part of British empire.

The source attached to the sentence of "british protectorate over afganistan" in the table doesnt even mention the word "protectorate" its obvious that afganistan is a protected state. Definition of protectorate:- British protectorates were protectorates under the jurisdiction of the British government. (Afganistan was not under jurisdication of Britian nor was it formally part of british empire) Protected states:-the following states were never officially part of the British Empire and retained near-total control over internal affairs; however, the British controlled their foreign policy. Their status was rarely advertised while it was in effect, it becoming clear only after it was lifted. ( Since afganistan had full control over its internal administration and britian only covered its foreign policy afanistan is a protected state and not a protectoeate of British) and all of these are mentioned in British protectorate wikipedia page.

O really? From the second cited source: "In short, Afghanistan was virtually a British protectorate until 1919." Now whether that source is reliable or not is another story, but what you're claiming is certainly wrong. Again, we don't base articles of other articles. And might it be that it's different in other articles because you are changing it :P? [1] --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

there are differences between the two possibilities but the goal of a protected state is that the Afghan state has full control over their internal affairs and that the English promise to protect them against enemy invaders and to pay the king each year it was the term of the treaty of Gandamak of the English with the emir Abdur Rahman Khan but they are deprived of their foreign business and also no British flag appearing in the Afghan flag and the afghan had not adopted the British money nor their anthem is exactly the aim of a protected state if you read the article on British protectorate now a protectorate where a country promises its protectorate to protect it and to pay all their military and administrative expenses in return for the country placed. under the protectorate will have to adopt the anthem of the country which placed it under its protectorate as a national anthem will have to accept the money as national money and will have to adopt a small flag of the country above their flag exactly like the French protectorate of Morocco AfghansPashtun (talk) 12:59, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

and also I had forgotten to specify that afghanistan was never part of the British empire because it was a protected state while Morocco was officially part of the French colonial empire during its protectorate AfghansPashtun (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfghansPashtun We can see there are deep feelings about this issue. Unfortunately, using wikipedia as a source for itself is not allowed. The sources that people are quoting to discuss the state of British control over Afghanistan at this time are using the word protectorate. Please, a reminder, words have more than one meaning (if they are not completely boring), and the word protectorate is not defined merely by a wikipedia article. A suggestion: there is a lot of energy going into changing one word, that should be spent finding reliable sources that discuss Afghanistan at the time and address the issue in the text, showing the nuances of British influence/control, &c. If one word keeps being changed without any reference backing this up, then other editors, in the good practice of requiring reliable sources, will revert the edit. Another suggestion: Google Scholar is one possible source of references, but please people need to look at the WP guidelines on editing and sources. I do thank you for your energy and enthusiasm to make WP a better thing. Brunswicknic (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reference clearly states: “In this treaty, the Amir of Kabul, a previous ruler of Afghanistan, not only ceded various territories but also handed over diplomatic rights to the British. In short, Afghanistan was virtually a British protectorate until 1919.”

So you have to stick to reference as proof. As far as links on other articles on Wikipedia, those are not reliable just like Wikipedia states that it’s articles can be plain wrong or vandalized especially since anyone can edit at any time.

Bottom line, information should be what the reference states. HaughtonBrit (talk) 00:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Sock puppet, the sources in the article don't even confirm Afghanistan was a british protectorate, it just says that it BASICALLY is one. Noorullah21 (talk) 00:08, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2021

182.185.114.99 (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan Victory 1st and 2nd war

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 22:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan Protectorate State

[2] Reference states: According to a large number of previous studies, Afghanistan was fixed as a buffer state between Russia and British India as a result of the war and the Gandamak Treaty, which was concluded between Amīr Ya‘qūb Khān and the British on 26 May 1879, substantially as proof of the surrender of the Afghan side. In this treaty, the Amīr of Kabul, a previous ruler of Afghanistan, not only ceded various territories but also handed over diplomatic rights to the British. In short, Afghanistan was virtually a British protectorate until 1919. Source confirms it. 199.82.243.102 (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is..incorrect as multiple other sources state that Afghanistan was not a British protectorate. Your source only says “virtually a british protectorate” not confirming it in anyway sort of form, it is not included apart of British India as well. You can read sources provided including from James Onely. Noorullah21 (talk) 23:05, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple sources state that during the Treaty of Gandamak, the Emir of Afghanistan signed the British PROTECTORATE over Afghanistan. The source on the article has no mention about the treaty or the details about the treaty. By the way virtually means in essence, or for all intents and purposes. But regardless, there are numerous articles and books but academic scholars where Afghanistan has been considered British Protectorate as signed by the Emir during the treaty of Gandamak. Reference 1, [3] states Afghanistan after 1879 is a classic example of protectorate. Following the Peace of Gandamak, the Amir of Afghanistan agreed to leave the control of his foreign relations to the British Government....Afghanistan's status as a PROTECTORATE was recognized in the Anglo Russian Agreement of 1907. Reference 2, [4]. Reference states that 1879, May 26 - Peace of Gandamak. Afghanistan became, in effect, a protectorate of Great Britain. Reference 3, [5] Reference states that At the Treaty of Gandamak in 1879 Afghanistan became a British PROTECTORATE and Kabul was opened up to a British mission, something Afghans still consider to be an appalling loss of face. Reference 4, [6] Reference states The following year, Anglo Indian troops invaded Afghanistan and imposed, through the treaty of Gandamak signed on May 26, 1879, an English PROTECTORATE and the loss of control over the Khyber Pass.... Reference 5, [7] Reference states In 1878, the Second Anglo-Afghan war broke out. It ended two years later with the Treaty of Gandamak, which effectively made Afghanistan a PROTECTORATE of Britain. Reference 6 [8] Reference states Afghanistan was technically a PROTECTORATE of the British Empire since the treaty of Gandamak of 1879 and reinforced in the Durand line accord of 1893. All the sources confirms Afghanistan as a British PROTECTORATE state as per the treaty of Gandamak. 199.82.243.102 (talk) 10:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Second_Anglo-Afghan_War&oldid=1045201808"