Does Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk ignore the role of the Indian army?

[shaz619]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-40724861

Christopher Nolan's epic World War Two film, Dunkirk, which tells the story of the mass evacuation of Allied troops from the northern coast of France in 1940, has been getting glowing reviews in India.

But many are glowering over Nolan turning a blind eye to the role of Indian soldiers in the battle. The Times of India wrote that their "significant contribution" was missing from Nolan's "otherwise brilliant" work. Writing for Bloomberg View, columnist Mihir Sharma said the film "adds to the falsehood that plucky Britons stood alone against Nazi Germany once France fell, when, in fact, hundreds of millions of imperial subjects stood, perforce, with them".

Few can deny the role of the subjects. Some five million Commonwealth servicemen joined the military services of the British empire during WW2. Almost half of them were from South Asia. Indian soldiers played a key role in major battles like Tobruk, Monte Cassino, Kohima and Imphal. A multinational force of British, Indian and African units recaptured Burma (Myanmar) for the Allies.

What happened with the Indian soldiers in Dunkirk is less clear. Yasmin Khan, historian and author of The Raj at War: A People's History of India's Second World War, says she has often wondered why there is very little factual data on their role in the battle, which many say cost Germany the war.

What is well known, she told me, is that four companies of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps, including a unit of the Bikaner State forces, served in France during the campaign on the Western Front, and some were evacuated from Dunkirk. Among them were three contingents of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps. One contingent was taken prisoner by German forces.

According to one account, India also provided more than 2,500 mules - shipped from Bombay (now Mumbai) to Marseilles - to the war effort as the British animal transport companies had been phased out. An Indian soldier, Jemadar Maula Dad Khan, was feted for showing "magnificent courage, coolness and decision" in protecting his men and animals when they were shelled from the ground and strafed from the air by the enemy.

The Indian soldiers and the mules were eventually ordered towards the coast. Many of the men could not take their animals on the retreat and gave them away to local people in France, according to the same account.
Historian John Broich says the Indian soldiers in Dunkirk were "particularly cool under fire and well organised during the retreat".

"They weren't large in number, maybe a few hundred among hundreds of thousands, but their appearance in the film would have provided a good reminder of how utterly central the role of the Indian Army was in the war," he told Slate.

"Their service meant the difference between victory and defeat. In fact, while Britain and other allies were licking their wounds after Dunkirk, the Indian Army picked up the slack in North Africa and the Middle East.

'Survival story'

To be fair, Nolan has said that he approached the story "from the point of view of the pure mechanics of survival rather than from the politics of the event".
"We don't have generals in rooms pushing things around on maps. We don't see Churchill. We barely glimpse the enemy," he told the Telegraph. "It's a survival story."

Historian Joshua Levine, who is also the film's historical consultant, told me that Dunkirk was a work of fiction and "it isn't a film's job to tell the full story of Dunkirk... and nor, in the time available, could it even try to do so".

"This film focuses on a few protagonists whose paths cross occasionally, each one of whom experiences just a tiny corner of the whole story. As Hilary Mantel says about historical fiction, 'The man who is fighting can't see over the hill, out of the trench.' What I'd love to see, though, is an Indian film about Dunkirk, or WW2 generally, and I sincerely hope Indian filmmakers are working on it."
But what about the criticism that the role of Indian and their South Asian counterparts in WW2 has been forgotten?

Yasmin Khan says that their "sheer scale of the contribution" has become apparent in Britain in recent years. "No longer is it simply an island story of heroic, plucky British fighting against Nazi-occupied continental Europe; it has now become increasingly customary for historians to refer to the contribution made by Asian, African and Caribbean servicemen in the 1940s", she writes in her book.

A memorial to honour the role of these soldiers came up on London's Constitution Hill in 2002. There have been museum exhibitions, oral history projects and TV documentaries to "reveal how crucial they [the soldiers] often were to the action, the sacrifices that they made in the face of terrible odds, and also to divulge individual stories of great bravery and intrepid action".
"It is no longer true to suggest that this is an entirely forgotten story," she says.

Meanwhile, Indians are flocking to watch Dunkirk, which opened at 416 screens, including 10 Imax screens, across the country, on Friday.
Unlike most Hollywood films, Dunkirk hasn't been dubbed in any Indian language for wider viewership. Still, says Denzil Dias of Warner Brothers (India), the film raked in $2.4m (£1.84m) over the weekend. "This is the biggest opening of an English language-only film in India," Mr Dias told me. Clearly, viewers are not fretting about the lack of Indian soldiers in Nolan's tour-de-force.

 

[Robert]

Four companies of Indian soldiers. That's 400 out of 400,000.

A film was made about WW1 where there were hundreds of thousands of Empire troops in the trenches, or the Italy campaign where there was a Sikh Brigade, or of course the WW2 Far East campaign should address this issue.

 

[CricketCartoons]

They deserve it for fighting for their oppressors.

 

[SandyB]

I see this a bit pointless. Nolan makes the movie from almost a 1st or 2nd person perspective. There is a lack of germans, french and belgian forces shown as well. And <1000 Troops out of 400000 Brits doesn't give us a solid enough argument too.

The bigger tragedy is the complete lack of acknowledgement of the Indian Troops in the Eastern theater of WW1 and WW2, by past films and Indians themselves and the general western discussions on both the wars.

We desis tend to brand them as merely "mercenaries" or "guns for hire", as they don't fit the "nationalist" narrative.

 

[CricketCartoons]

We desis tend to brand them as merely "mercenaries" or "guns for hire", as they don't fit the "nationalist" narrative.

And that is the truth. There is no other way to describe them.

 

[shaz619]

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] [MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] what do you guys think

 

[shaz619]

Four companies of Indian soldiers. That's 400 out of 400,000.

A film was made about WW1 where there were hundreds of thousands of Empire troops in the trenches, or the Italy campaign where there was a Sikh Brigade, or of course the WW2 Far East campaign should address this issue.

400 or 100K, they are all human beings regardless.

 

[JaDed]

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] [MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] what do you guys think

Nolan and British can direct how he/they want,can't comment on how and why Indians decided to fight a war which in no way mattered to them except that India would had been free had British lost.

 

[MenInG]

An excellent movie this one. Had been waiting to watch it for months now and not disappointed

Its not Nolan's job to thank everyone of the 338k participants. His job was to convey a story to a generation which probably knows nothing about it and he did a great job with his story telling technique.

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=46929]shaz619[/MENTION] - would you have wanted one face in a thousand at the Mole scene to been brown then? What would that have achieved?

 

[shaz619]

[MENTION=46929]shaz619[/MENTION] - would you have wanted one face in a thousand at the Mole scene to been brown then? What would that have achieved?

I haven't said that, I just pointed out that 400 or 100K all are human beings are they not since you pointed out the tiny number

 

[Robert]

Nolan and British can direct how he/they want,can't comment on how and why Indians decided to fight a war which in no way mattered to them except that India would had been free had British lost.

Free?

India would have been conquered by the Imperial Japanese and turned into a slave labour camp with mass rape of 'comfort women' and human vivisection.

 

[shaz619]

Free?

India would have been conquered by the Imperial Japanese and turned into a slave labour camp with mass rape of 'comfort women' and human vivisection.

True, I suppose that justifies British Imperialism good point mate

 

[JaDed]

Free?

India would have been conquered by the Imperial Japanese and turned into a slave labour camp with mass rape of 'comfort women' and human vivisection.

Yes and we were loved by the British that divided India and caused a problem unresolved,killing many.
What do they teach in Britain ,they did us a favor by winning the world war??

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You have to look at it from Nolan's viewpoint. He is making the movie for one reason above all: audiences. Does the audience care if Indian soldiers were shown or that they were left out? I would think probably not, a few outraged literati apart. Indian audiences themselves will lap the movie up and watch in wide eyed wonder at the exploits of the American and European heroes of Dunkirk. Nolan knows this fine well, that is why he knows he doesn't need to change anything in order to capture the world audience. I predict a stonking hit and that is all the justification Nolan needs.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Dunkirk movie was about the cowardice of british soldiers, and the bravery of british commoners. So don't think anyone should complain that their soldiers were not represented.

 

[GBK_Fan]

Free?

India would have been conquered by the Imperial Japanese and turned into a slave labour camp with mass rape of 'comfort women' and human vivisection.

Ohh lord!! Those privileges are only reserved for our white British overlords. Thank you for civilising us

 

[GBK_Fan]

So easy to outrage on a western movie. Good job Outrage Inc

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Meanwhile, Indians are flocking to watch Dunkirk, which opened at 416 screens, including 10 Imax screens, across the country, on Friday.
Unlike most Hollywood films, Dunkirk hasn't been dubbed in any Indian language for wider viewership. Still, says Denzil Dias of Warner Brothers (India), the film raked in $2.4m (£1.84m) over the weekend. "This is the biggest opening of an English language-only film in India," Mr Dias told me. Clearly, viewers are not fretting about the lack of Indian soldiers in Nolan's tour-de-force.

Proves my point. Indians probably aren't even aware themselves that they were represented in the world wars. Nolan knows what sells, and that is British heroes fighting a courageous war against the evil Nazis. If a few Africans and Indian footsoldiers were there as well it's hardly important to the narrative of the story.

 

[shaz619]

Proves my point. Indians probably aren't even aware themselves that they were represented in the world wars. Nolan knows what sells, and that is British heroes fighting a courageous war against the evil Nazis. If a few Africans and Indian footsoldiers were there as well it's hardly important to the narrative of the story.

It may end its box office run in India as the best English language film

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

It may end its box office run in India as the best English language film

Think about where the term British Raj came from. Indians can't help but admire us and see us as born leaders of the free world. Britain may be small in geographical terms but our impact is still massive.

 

[Slog]

Free?

India would have been conquered by the Imperial Japanese and turned into a slave labour camp with mass rape of 'comfort women' and human vivisection.

Subcontinental people arent folks who take things lying down unlike Africans or South Americans

We would have sent them packing soon enough.

European powers totally decimated local American cultures to the point where they even speak Spanish (or in case of US, English) as first languages now/ Same story in some places local Africa.

However even now a lot of our culture is still there and we speak our own languages (English is for convenience for its global status)

So dont give this BS of Japanese enslaving people as if the British colonialist savages were some force for good

 

[Slog]

Yes and we were loved by the British that divided India and caused a problem unresolved,killing many.
What do they teach in Britain ,they did us a favor by winning the world war??

India was already divided. There was never one 'india' as you wish or your schools taught you

British were evil but the divisions were always there

 

[SandyB]

Proves my point. Indians probably aren't even aware themselves that they were represented in the world wars. Nolan knows what sells, and that is British heroes fighting a courageous war against the evil Nazis. If a few Africans and Indian footsoldiers were there as well it's hardly important to the narrative of the story.

Well over 3 -4 lakh of Indian soldiers fought in the two World Wars, and historical accounts of the Allies say our people fought very bravely .

It's a shame people of India and Pakistan are completely unaware of it.

We are the same countries who go nut over some American born brown kid winning spelling bees or serving the US army etc .

 

[SandyB]

India was already divided. There was never one 'india' as you wish or your schools taught you

British were evil but the divisions were always there

There were always divisions. But it wasn't just Religion though.

 

[kaayal]

Think about where the term British Raj came from. Indians can't help but admire us and see us as born leaders of the free world. Britain may be small in geographical terms but our impact is still massive.

We have big heart's Captain. We don't hold any grudge.

 

[JaDed]

India was already divided. There was never one 'india' as you wish or your schools taught you

British were evil but the divisions were always there

Yes but it was divided based on language and culture not religion as such.

 

[Pakistanian]

Well India was owned by the British back then so there wasn't an indian army, just servants of the british army.

 

[TM Riddle]

My great grandfather was a decorated soldier from the great war of 1914-18 having served and won many battles in the Mesopotamian campaign of British and he wasn't alone in that regard either.The Haifa memorial which the PM Modi recently visited and which was erected in the memory of the battle which involved Indian troops successfully capturing the strategic location had its hero in Major Dalpat Singh Shekhawat , a distant relative who got martyred fighting for the Brits and was subsequently awarded Victoria cross posthumously.
Insulting and vilifying these people just because they don't fit in the nationalistic narrative of certain group of people is something which is unique to India and Indians and I don't blame them either considering most of them suffer from an inferiority complex and are likely to be that way whether be independent or not.

 

[TM Riddle]

India was already divided. There was never one 'india' as you wish or your schools taught you

British were evil but the divisions were always there

Historically the region beyond Indus had always been culturally and geographically considered as a single unit.
Keep trying.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Don't care. Absolutely amazing movie. Movies of this quality are rare nowadays so we should stop having these minor gripes about them and appreciate what we are getting. Instead kids today hype up comic book movie garbage

 

[Stewie]

I saw it and quite honestly I didn't find it that good. Maybe in second viewing it will get better but I was expecting something like saving private Ryan, Schindler' list, etc and this it wasn't!

 

[marlonbrowndo]

I saw it and quite honestly I didn't find it that good. Maybe in second viewing it will get better but I was expecting something like saving private Ryan, Schindler' list, etc and this it wasn't!

Saving Private Ryan is a better movie but they are completely different. Maybe you went in with the wrong expectations hoping for a full on action war movie.

 

[Pakistanian]

Historically the region beyond Indus had always been culturally and geographically considered as a single unit.
Keep trying.

Only to foreigners and the that "one unit" doesn't stretch into south india cause they had separate kingdoms and civilization for like forever. So if you wanna claim us then you gotta let them go , y'all can't have it both ways.

 

[shaz619]

Don't care. Absolutely amazing movie. Movies of this quality are rare nowadays so we should stop having these minor gripes about them and appreciate what we are getting. Instead kids today hype up comic book movie garbage

Yeah it was incredible. So true, same inept bacha party were giving wonder woman ratings of 8+/10

 

[Stewie]

Saving Private Ryan is a better movie but they are completely different. Maybe you went in with the wrong expectations hoping for a full on action war movie.

No no, but I was expecting more character development or character driven story or characters you can sympathize with.

The two soldiers just want out and resort to cheating to save their lives, I found their efforts to skip lines and all not heroic at all. I like tom hardy' character but it was very short. Mark rylance's character was my favorite of them all. Kenneth Branagh did good and looked heroic as well, quite honestly I can't yet put my finger in why I am not loving this movie because I am just not when technically I should.

It's my favorite director
Some of the best current actors
My favorite film subject


Maybe a case of too much expectation or maybe a lack of German soldiers! I don't know

 

[shaz619]

My great grandfather was a decorated soldier from the great war of 1914-18 having served and won many battles in the Mesopotamian campaign of British and he wasn't alone in that regard either.The Haifa memorial which the PM Modi recently visited and which was erected in the memory of the battle which involved Indian troops successfully capturing the strategic location had its hero in Major Dalpat Singh Shekhawat , a distant relative who got martyred fighting for the Brits and was subsequently awarded Victoria cross posthumously.
Insulting and vilifying these people just because they don't fit in the nationalistic narrative of certain group of people is something which is unique to India and Indians and I don't blame them either considering most of them suffer from an inferiority complex and are likely to be that way whether be independent or not.

Fair play to your grandpa

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Yeah it was incredible. So true, same inept bacha party were giving wonder woman ratings of 8+/10

We're they the same ones saying Logan is better than The Dark Knight?

 

[shaz619]

No no, but I was expecting more character development or character driven story or characters you can sympathize with.

The two soldiers just want out and resort to cheating to save their lives, I found their efforts to skip lines and all not heroic at all. I like tom hardy' character but it was very short. Mark rylance's character was my favorite of them all. Kenneth Branagh did good and looked heroic as well, quite honestly I can't yet put my finger in why I am not loving this movie because I am just not when technically I should.

It's my favorite director
Some of the best current actors
My favorite film subject


Maybe a case of too much expectation or maybe a lack of German soldiers! I don't know

He could have made the movie exactly as you describe but Nolan challenges himself with regards to making something unique, issue with that is it may not be everyones cup of tea. Personally I found it enthralling and an incredible experience, the action conveyed all the emotion , narrative and character depth; felt it was structured quiet well and made you feel as if you were there. Have never seen so much depth when it came to cinematography and the direction especially the aerial scenes were spectacular, Nolan benefited from modern tech and IMAX cameras but he execution of his vision was great

 

[shaz619]

We're they the same ones saying Logan is better than The Dark Knight?

Not a lot between the two and logan was excellent. To give wonder woman 8+/10 is an absolute joke though, such fans are a disgrace and incredibly thick when it comes to their judgement of movies.

 

[Stewie]

He could have made the movie exactly as you describe but Nolan challenges himself with regards to making something unique, issue with that is it may not be everyones cup of tea. Personally I found it enthralling and an incredible experience, the action conveyed all the emotion , narrative and character depth; felt it was structured quiet well and made you feel as if you were there. Have never seen so much depth when it came to cinematography and the direction especially the aerial scenes were spectacular, Nolan benefited from modern tech and IMAX cameras but he execution of his vision was great

No, I appreciated all those qualities, believe me, I admit technically it's a very good movie but somehow it felt short for me and maybe it was the lack of more standard action sequences, quite possible, or the non traditional non linear format of story telling, which I used to but still, and lack of a so called central character, maybe.

I'll have to watch it again and then maybe I can explain. There was certainly very little dialogue in the whole movie. That could be it.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Not a lot between the two and logan was excellent. To give wonder woman 8+/10 is an absolute joke though, such fans are a disgrace and incredibly thick when it comes to their judgement of movies.

Were* I made a mistake and I acknowledge that mistake. Roger Ebert gave The Usual suspects a 1.5/4 which is an absolute howler. He made a bad call just like I did. It happens. Are you gonna bash him for that for the rest of your life? You however don't acknowledge your mistake. There is a big gap in quality between Logan and TDK. My judgement on movies has been so immaculate that my Wonder Woman mistake is the only thing that you bring up any more.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Haven't seen the movie but I think Shaz619's point has a bigger picture to it. I can't recall a Hollywood movie which has made hero's out of Asians or Arabs, it usually portrays them as backward, lesser evolved than white people.

 

[Stewie]

Haven't seen the movie but I think Shaz619's point has a bigger picture to it. I can't recall a Hollywood movie which has made hero's out of Asians or Arabs, it usually portrays them as backward, lesser evolved than white people.

Our movies mostly portray whites as evil and racists

 

[Slog]

Historically the region beyond Indus had always been culturally and geographically considered as a single unit.
Keep trying.

No it wasn't. It was seen as one continent of sorts like Europe was and South America or Africa was

The only trying here is trying to teach you Guys some history lessons

 

[TM Riddle]

No it wasn't. It was seen as one continent of sorts like Europe was and South America or Africa was

The only trying here is trying to teach you Guys some history lessons

How about you provide me some authentic historical sources to back up your point and then we will see who needs history lessons here.

 

[Robert]

Yes and we were loved by the British that divided India and caused a problem unresolved,killing many.
What do they teach in Britain ,they did us a favor by winning the world war??

No, they don't talk about you at all.

If you think the Raj was bad, look up the Rape of Nanking.

 

[Robert]

True, I suppose that justifies British Imperialism good point mate

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I merely corrected the idea that India would have been free if Britain lost the war. The Japanese would have rolled over India like the tide, as they did to much of China and all of Korea, Burma and Siam. A few collaborator Britons might have been left in admin posts, like the Vichy French in Indo-China.

 

[Robert]

Haven't seen the movie but I think Shaz619's point has a bigger picture to it. I can't recall a Hollywood movie which has made hero's out of Asians or Arabs, it usually portrays them as backward, lesser evolved than white people.

[MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION] I recommend The Beast of War, a thoughtful film about a Soviet tank crew verses Mujahideen in Afghanistan.

 

[JaDed]

No, they don't talk about you at all.

If you think the Raj was bad, look up the Rape of Nanking.

All I can look up is what happened to my area and guess what pops up "Jallianwala bagh", so please keep the world war and all that logic on your tiny Island doesn't matter to me.

 

[Robert]

All I can look up is what happened to my area and guess what pops up "Jallianwala bagh", so please keep the world war and all that logic on your tiny Island doesn't matter to me.

Come on, don't cop out, examine your beliefs. Read about the Rape of Nanking and ask yourself what would have befallen India had the Axis won.

 

[JaDed]

Come on, don't cop out, examine your beliefs. Read about the Rape of Nanking and ask yourself what would have befallen India had the Axis won.

I have read about it and it has nothing to do with this topic,India is huge ,Japs or British both would had been terrible for us,who cares if Axis won,its your war nothing to do with us but still got so many from this part of the world killed.

 

[shaz619]

I have read about it and it has nothing to do with this topic,India is huge ,Japs or British both would had been terrible for us,who cares if Axis won,its your war nothing to do with us but still got so many from this part of the world killed.

Everything Britain did to India was god awful on so many levels and he accepts that but is just pointing out that had Axis won then it may not have been in the best interests of the whole world including subcontinent, think about it; would you be compatible with a Hitler and crazed Jap running about? would things be better now? am not so sure

 

[JaDed]

Everything Britain did to India was god awful on so many levels and he accepts that but is just pointing out that had Axis won then it may not have been in the best interests of the whole world including subcontinent, think about it; would you be compatible with a Hitler and crazed Jap running about? would things be better now? am not so sure

From an Indian pov Churchil was a monster,Hitler had no effect on us,the issue here is Hitler(except Holocaust) was expanding which was similar to what Europeans have done for years making colonies around the world,the war with machine guns is similar to war with rifles.

 

[shaz619]

From an Indian pov Churchil was a monster,Hitler had no effect on us,the issue here is Hitler(except Holocaust) was expanding which was similar to what Europeans have done for years making colonies around the world,the war with machine guns is similar to war with rifles.

In that case what would have been your preferred outcome of WWII ?

 

[CricketCartoons]

From an Indian pov Churchil was a monster,Hitler had no effect on us,the issue here is Hitler(except Holocaust) was expanding which was similar to what Europeans have done for years making colonies around the world,the war with machine guns is similar to war with rifles.

Don't you know that dropping nuclear bombs saved so many lives from the imperial japanese. Those nukes should have been awarded nobel peace prize.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

In that case what would have been your preferred outcome of WWII ?

WWII aside, does India even get involved directly in international wars? I don't think they are part of NATO, and as far as I know they don't get troops sent to trouble hotspots for the UN like Pakistan army has in the past.

 

[JaDed]

In that case what would have been your preferred outcome of WWII ?

Personally would had preferred Britain to lose WW1. Don't know about WW2,German's cruelty is well documented in WW2 but they lost the war and history probably is on Allies favor in terms of propaganda and "defenders" of freedom stuff.

All this is fantasy anyway,India might had been divided into many regions who knows but atleast the partition bloodshed would had been avoided if Brits lost WW1.

 

[shaz619]

WWII aside, does India even get involved directly in international wars? I don't think they are part of NATO, and as far as I know they don't get troops sent to trouble hotspots for the UN like Pakistan army has in the past.

Rarely, don't think they ever have; it may be a combination of them not wanting to and not being required at the same time

 

[shaz619]

Personally would had preferred Britain to lose WW1. Don't know about WW2,German's cruelty is well documented in WW2 but they lost the war and history probably is on Allies favor in terms of propaganda and "defenders" of freedom stuff.

All this is fantasy anyway,India might had been divided into many regions who knows but atleast the partition bloodshed would had been avoided if Brits lost WW1.

Partition would have been inevitable to be honest despite external factors, I'd like to see a world where everyone got on and lived in peace under the same roof but history suggests otherwise unfortunately

 

[Robert]

I have read about it and it has nothing to do with this topic,India is huge ,Japs or British both would had been terrible for us,who cares if Axis won,its your war nothing to do with us but still got so many from this part of the world killed.

You said that if the British lost WW2 then India would have been free. I drew your attention to the Japanese Empire which took territory on a far greater scale than India and turned it all into a massive slave labour camp.

If there are any of such valiant old men left, ask Indian soldiers who fought the Japanese whether WW2 was nothing to do with you.

 

[JaDed]

WWII aside, does India even get involved directly in international wars? I don't think they are part of NATO, and as far as I know they don't get troops sent to trouble hotspots for the UN like Pakistan army has in the past.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2013/12/un-praise-indian-peacekeepers-s-sudan-2013122374237681429.html

UN praise for Indian peacekeepers in S Sudan
Official says Indian troops saved lives by acting with alacrity to fend off attack, that left two soldiers dead.

Except the keyboard warriors and maybe politicians,Indian Army doesn't do much PR so it happens.

 

[JaDed]

You said that if the British lost WW2 then India would have been free. I drew your attention to the Japanese Empire which took territory on a far greater scale than India and turned it all into a massive slave labour camp.

If there are any of such valiant old men left, ask Indian soldiers who fought the Japanese whether WW2 was nothing to do with you.

First your assumption here was I was speaking about WW2,post 58

 

[Robert]

Personally would had preferred Britain to lose WW1. Don't know about WW2,German's cruelty is well documented in WW2 but they lost the war and history probably is on Allies favor in terms of propaganda and "defenders" of freedom stuff.

All this is fantasy anyway,India might had been divided into many regions who knows but atleast the partition bloodshed would had been avoided if Brits lost WW1.

This is a different matter and an interesting question. Presumably if Britain had been forced to sue for peace with the Central Powers, the Royal Navy would have been seized and much of the Emoire would have collapsed.

 

[JaDed]

Partition would have been inevitable to be honest despite external factors, I'd like to see a world where everyone got on and lived in peace under the same roof but history suggests otherwise unfortunately

No one knows that,India could had been a losely based union divided on linguistic basis,checkout when the demands for partition started.

Most of the Indian leaders betrayed their people along with the Rajas when they supported Britain in WW1.

 

[JaDed]

This is a different matter and an interesting question. Presumably if Britain had been forced to sue for peace with the Central Powers, the Royal Navy would have been seized and much of the Emoire would have collapsed.

Yes and Indian home rule(as a union) could had happened,chaos maybe but still would had given us 30 more years and less blood shed ideally to get our issues sorted.

 

[shaz619]

You said that if the British lost WW2 then India would have been free. I drew your attention to the Japanese Empire which took territory on a far greater scale than India and turned it all into a massive slave labour camp.

If there are any of such valiant old men left, ask Indian soldiers who fought the Japanese whether WW2 was nothing to do with you.

They were absolutely brutal and literally raped asia; a friends relative of mine was a Japanese prisoner of war and they unleashed unspeakable evil.

 

[Adil_94]

my Grandad was POW for British Indian Army in Burma and if they beat the British they definitely wouldnt have just let India go on its merry way and become Independent.

Just like the Nazis wanted to create a slave empire in eastern europe.

The Japanese were inspired by A fascist version of Japanese nationalism and wanted to make an Asian empire. Of course they would want the jewel in the crown of the British Empire and would have no qualms with mass murdering millions to get it.

while the Brits committed many atrocities in India over their time there.

the nihlistic penchant for murder the Imperial Japanese forces had was even worse than them.

the Chinese and Koreans know that first hand.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2013/12/un-praise-indian-peacekeepers-s-sudan-2013122374237681429.html



Except the keyboard warriors and maybe politicians,Indian Army doesn't do much PR so it happens.

Interesting. I quite admired their stance of not getting involved in external wars anyway, but it seems they are involved in UN activities same as Pakistan.

 

[shaz619]

No one knows that,India could had been a losely based union divided on linguistic basis,checkout when the demands for partition started.

Most of the Indian leaders betrayed their people along with the Rajas when they supported Britain in WW1.

A land with so much diversity when it came to ethnicity and religion, there ought to have been some form of partition eventually

 

[shaz619]

my Grandad was POW for British Indian Army in Burma and if they beat the British they definitely wouldnt have just let India go on its merry way and become Independent.

Just like the Nazis wanted to create a slave empire in eastern europe.

The Japanese were inspired by A fascist version of Japanese nationalism and wanted to make an Asian empire. Of course they would want the jewel in the crown of the British Empire and would have no qualms with mass murdering millions to get it.

while the Brits committed many atrocities in India over their time there.

the nihlistic penchant for murder the Imperial Japanese forces had was even worse than them.

the Chinese and Koreans know that first hand.

Sorry to hear about your grandad, no human being deserves to go through all that. People tend to brush off the brutality of the Japs inspirations for the atrocities they were responsible for so easily, they never just had ulterior motives to prolong their political and geographical ambitions but like you say the fascist nationalism meant they weren't exactly folk you'd be compatible with having as your neighbour, no one would be better off regardless of where you live.

 

[KingKhanWC]

[MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION] I recommend The Beast of War, a thoughtful film about a Soviet tank crew verses Mujahideen in Afghanistan.

Is it an old film? I may have seen this. I remember a scene where they find an RPG and hit the tank.. but thanks.

 

[JaDed]

Is it an old film? I may have seen this. I remember a scene where they find an RPG and hit the tank.. but thanks.

Yes and then Soviety armyman goes away in the end via helicopter after killing his own,Kabir Bedi played a Mujahideen in that.(dies)

 

[JaDed]

my Grandad was POW for British Indian Army in Burma and if they beat the British they definitely wouldnt have just let India go on its merry way and become Independent.

Just like the Nazis wanted to create a slave empire in eastern europe.

The Japanese were inspired by A fascist version of Japanese nationalism and wanted to make an Asian empire. Of course they would want the jewel in the crown of the British Empire and would have no qualms with mass murdering millions to get it.

while the Brits committed many atrocities in India over their time there.

the nihlistic penchant for murder the Imperial Japanese forces had was even worse than them.

the Chinese and Koreans know that first hand.

Sorry to know about your grandfather and there were probably many people from SC that were involved in the wars that was no theirs.

 

[JaDed]

Interesting. I quite admired their stance of not getting involved in external wars anyway, but it seems they are involved in UN activities same as Pakistan.

Indian Army doesn't except when it comes to Bhutan,only other country where they will get involved if a war happens.
UN peace keeping is different although can't confirm for sure might be corporate sponsored.

 

[JaDed]

A land with so much diversity when it came to ethnicity and religion, there ought to have been some form of partition eventually

Its fantasy ,who knows how it would had been,but atleast Punjabis wouldn't had killed Punjabis ,same with Bengalis.

 

[venomousx]

what a garbage movie..can't believe there's a whole thread about it...it doesn't show ANYTHING let alone indians...waste of time and money
btw this is coming from a huge nolan fan

 

[Slog]

Historically the region beyond Indus had always been culturally and geographically considered as a single unit.
Keep trying.

By whom lol?

By outsiders who stereotyped Indians as folks riding on elelphants and worshipping cows. Basically by people too lazy to get into the intricacies of India

 

[Slog]

Come on, don't cop out, examine your beliefs. Read about the Rape of Nanking and ask yourself what would have befallen India had the Axis won.

India was not an active theater of war

Japan and China were actively involved in their own war independent of the global WWII and had tensions a nd skirmishes going back decades

 

[Slog]

what a garbage movie..can't believe there's a whole thread about it...it doesn't show ANYTHING let alone indians...waste of time and money
btw this is coming from a huge nolan fan

its an interesting movie about a specific part of the war

different movie. liked it.