Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "The First World War soldiers who were deliberately forgotten" video.

@gonnabeok Perhaps 1939-1945 passed you by. The British declared war on Germany because of the German invasion of Poland, and fought to overthrow hitler for over six years as a result.
7
Perhaps, if you wish to bring partition up, you might look closely at the role of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who was the driving force behind it.
6
Your reference to 'the Brits' is incorrect. The vast majority of the British population would have been delighted to honour the Poles. The lack of an invitation was because the British Government did not wish to annoy genial Uncle Joe. The British had a LABOUR government at the time, led by Clement Attlee.
5
@Boppy-B-B Oddly enough, my Grandfather's Regiment, actually one from the North of England and therefore unimportant to the right-thinking people who have taken over the IWM, also missed any victory parade. Apparently, he and his colleagues, with Passchendaele fresh in their minds, weren't much concerned about a parade, they just wanted to get home to their homes and families. I doubt the men of the British West Indian Regiment thought much differently, however the IWM people might seek to suggest otherwise.
4
@Sonof_DRN2004 Whether classified as 'British' or not (and they weren't, by the way) 2.5 million Indians volunteered to join the Allied cause in WW2.
4
@micksmithson6724 By interpreting historical events through a prism of modern opinion, in order to justify or promote a pre-existing agenda. This is simply bad history. Would you consider it justified to attack, for example, Marcus Aurelius for failing to introduce Old Age Pensions into the Roman Empire in 175 AD, or Charlemagne for not supporting transgender issues in 810AD? History can only be studied through an understanding of the period during which the events under examination unfolded.
3
@Boppy-B-B Indeed these events should be told. But they should not be interpreted through fashionable, and perhaps, transient, modish current prejudices.
3
@Boppy-B-B You do seem more than a little preoccupied with the word 'white.' Had someone made an equal use of the word 'black' I suspect an accusation of racism would have appeared by now.
3
@Boppy-B-B Perhaps you should read his post before responding in a knee jerk fashion. That wasn't actually what he wrote at all.
2
Clem Attlee's decision. He was PM at the time.
2
@lubey_lu Perhaps you should investigate the difference between serious academic historians, and museum curators with 'opinions?'
1
@Boppy-B-B It is not being 'corrected' but being 'interpreted.' Others are equally capable of interpreting history, without being told what they ought to think.
1
@kylemackenzie3381 In point of fact, the writer, Alan Wakefield, is not 'far more qualified' at all. He has an MA in a rather general field, that of 'War Studies' and a second one in 'Museum Studies.' Neither of which qualify him as an academic historian.
1
@Boppy-B-B How about the Portuguese, then? They transported far more African slaves to the New World than the British did. Having, of course, acquired them from African tribal leaders and Arab slave traders first. Isn't it odd that there is very little reference ever made to these inconvenient facts?
1