non-veg, veg and war is this true?

Question

in humans group war GENERALY more non-veg eater use to win the war? is history supports this theory?
Buddhist of India defeated by Hindus because there was more non-veg eater in Hindus compared to Buddhist and Hindus difited by Muslims because there was more non-veg eater in Muslims compared to hindus is this true?

Answer 1

Losing or Winning a War does'nt depend on Eating habits..but Skill and Strategy. So, the Answer to your Question is False.

Answer 2

People make a great differentiation between veg, and non veg people but there is only one major difference between the two. That is that vegitarians get their protien, heme iron, and other nutrients classicaly derived from animal meat from other sources.

Thats pretty much it. Can this difference equate to war fighting ability? Maybe, but without some strong evidence its a pretty hard thing to correlate. And even if they do correlate remember that correlation does not necessarily mean causation.

Answer 3

if you look at the history of wars. whether they were vegs or not had anything to do with winning. its all based on strategy. going back to the spartans. they were only 300 but defeated thousands. when the british came over the militia were woodsmen, knew the country ate of the land and defeated the british. world war one we ate meat and the germans were defeated. we defeated the japanese and they ate rice and fish. korea we ate meat and won, nam we sort of won but ate meat. the six day war of isreal against irag, egypt and jordon. they won it by strategy against three countries in six days. they ate meat. all the desert storm wars we ate meat and kicked their butts.

Answer 4

all vegetarians are lazy guys and gals.
They can never win a war.