Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Why Britain DIDN'T stand alone against Nazi Germany" video.

  1. Oh dear, the distorted revisionist claptrap about the Bengal famine yet again. Actually, the Bengal Famine had a number of causes, among which were the number of refugees from Japanese held areas, the inability to import food from those same areas, stockpiling by hoarders and, perhaps worst of all, the Bengal administration, which tried to minimise the crisis. The worst that could be said of Churchill was that he should have known what was taking place, but didn't. After all, in 1943, he had little else to worry about. You could also add the refusal of FDR to allow the transfer of merchant shipping, by the way. What is without dispute, except by those who choose to blame Churchill for everything since the Black Death, is that once he did find out, he transferred food distribution to the British Indian Army, and had grain convoys diverted from Australia to India. I appreciate, of course, that you won't believe any of this, as it doesn't suit the agenda.
    11
  2.  @christinemcclymont269  Indeed. Clem Attlee and the Labour Government have never received the criticism they deserved for their betrayal of the Poles they handed over to genial Uncle Joe.
    6
  3.  @dscott6629  In point of fact, the British army actually recovered quite rapidly after Dunkirk & Aerial, to the extent that by August it was possible to send a large troop convoy to North Africa. By 17 September, there were 34.5 divisions in Britain, of which 20 were allocated to coastal defence, with 14.5 in reserve.
    5
  4.  @Boppy-B-B  How is that 'segregation?' Gurkhas did, by the way have their own officers, as also did Indian formations. Within an 'Indian' Brigade, by the way, there were usually three battalions. Two were Indian, and one British. Read about, for example, 4th Indian Division at 2nd Alamein, which had three infantry brigades, consisting of 3 British & 6 Indian, battalions.
    5
  5.  @dscott6629  Firstly, most of today's historians are, evidently unlike you, informed enough to know that Churchill held no political office at all between 1929 and September, 1939. Pat Buchanan, a right-wing holocaust denier, is hardly a credible historian. You might as well read 'Volkischer Beobachter for an accurate account of the events of WW2. The Anglo-French treaty with Poland was intended to draw a (some would say, belated) line in the sand to head off further German aggression. Why exactly do you think Britain and France wanted to go to war? France had been entirely defensive in posture (hence the Maginot Line) and Britain with a tiny army, had no ability at all to embark upon a major land campaign.
    4
  6. If the British used 'colonials' as cannon fodder, isn't it rather odd that British military casualties in both world wars were significantly higher, in terms of a percentage of the national population, than those of any colony or Dominion? Still, why bother with facts when you can simply post prejudices?
    4
  7. Small point. No divisions from Australia or New Zealand ever came to Britain. A Canadian division did, arriving in early 1940.
    3
  8.  @michaelmayo3127  Germany, of course, rarely bothered to declare war on anyone. The first clue was generally the arrival of troops, tanks, and bombers, followed a few days later by einsatzgruppen. Certainly Hitler didn't want war with Britain. He simply wanted Britain to stand by as he invaded and conquered the rest of Europe. I suppose you think that was a reasonable desire?
    3
  9. I don't think anyone is, but as this video is about 1940, the Soviets were only involved as suppliers of raw materials to Germany.
    3
  10. 'I always thought the major point of "Britain standing alone" was that it was the last country in Europe actually still fighting.' Of course it was. sadly, the Imperial War Museum is a steadily declining institution, due to the political prejudices of those who manage it.
    3
  11. Whereas most of the provinces of the European Empire are rather used to being governed by Germany, so it isn't really a big deal for them.
    3
  12. If you had visited the IWM recently (as I did, just before the first lockdown) you wouldn't even need to ask that question.
    2
  13. What 'rosy nationalist myth?' No one with any knowledge of the period has ever had any doubt about the fact that Britain received the support of the Dominions and the Empire.
    2
  14. Why post then?
    2
  15. Isn't hindsight wonderful? By June 1940, Germany had invaded Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, and Belgium (all, by the way, without declaration of war) and had conquered France. Large German forces were within 22 miles of a UK defended almost entirely by the Royal Navy. The Soviet Union had done a disreputable deal with Germany over Poland, and had occupied the Baltic States. Was Soviet Russia really the greater threat to Britain than nazi Germany. The reality, as recognised by both Churchill & FDR, was that nazi Germany was the greater of two evils, and that 'my enemy's enemy is my friend.' If you are ashamed to be British, probably that is due to your lack of knowledge.
    2
  16. What legends? The reality is that in 1940 the only military support from the Empire came from Canada. Raw materials were supplied from a number of places within the Empire, but had to be conveyed to Britain in British merchantmen, escorted by British warships.
    2
  17. Really? Care to give examples?
    2
  18. Don't get so upset. Woodrow Wilson was instrumental in determining the borders of Europe after WW1, or at least equally responsible with Clemenceau and Lloyd-George. Subsequently, US Presidents chose to walk away from the mess they had helped to create. It almost seems a familiar scenario!
    2
  19.  @Boppy-B-B  Which troops, apart from Canada? The RCN was not the major player in the Battle of the Atlantic, the Royal Navy was.
    1
  20. Nonsense. Wartime volunteers or conscripted servicemen from all nations were demobbed as soon as possible when the war ended. After their service ended, what sort of payment would they have expected?
    1
  21. Why is trying to avoid mass slaughter 'cowardice?' The Munich agreement was enormously popular in France and Britain, where the civilian population (presumably, in your gung ho view, oddly) were quite keen on not having their menfolk killed in large numbers once again. Just out of interest, by the way, the first Spitfires entered service in August, 1938 and, whether you like it or not, the Agreement gave British an extra year in which to re-arm. Would you like a list of the warships which were commissioned, launched, or ordered during that period? I'm sure you find it easy to condemn people from your comfy chair, 85 years after the event.
    1
  22. Nonsense. There was no conscription in India.
    1
  23. Canada, like Australia, New Zealand, & South Africa, were self-governing independent dominions in 1939, and made their own decisions. Churchill, by the way, held no government position between 1929 & 1939, when he joined the cabinet of a nation already at war. Don't let that affect your ill-informed prejudice, however.
    1
  24.  @andyrob3259  Unfortunately, this particular video seems to have a fairly obvious 'agenda.'
    1
  25.  @anthonyeaton5153  Germany, of course, rarely declared war on anyone. The first warning given was generally the arrival of German tanks, troops, and aircraft.
    1
  26. Nonsense. You will not find many references to Indian troops where Operation Sealion is confirmed, because there were no Indian military units in Britain. The nearest at the time was a division in North Africa. The role of Indian & African units in the campaigns in North African, Italy, and Burma is well documented, and was equally well documented at the time. Of course, you won't easily read about it if you prefer not to look.
    1
  27. @The Stupendous Fabuloso Charisma Channel You mean like the 2.5 million Indians who volunteered to join the Allied armed forces?
    1
  28. You think so? Have you read how black American troops were treated when they arrived in Britain, when compared to the enforced segregation in the US army. Did you know that divisions in the Indian army usually consisted of British and Indian battalions serving alongside each other? Indeed, do you actually know anything other than the propaganda you have apparently absorbed?
    1
  29. Much of what you say is correct, but it doesn't suit the agenda of those who have taken control of the IWM.
    1
  30.  @stevetaylor5933  Bamber Bridge, near Preston, in Lancashire. The locals actually supported black troops of a transport company who were being assaulted by white MPs, mainly from the Southern States. Sorry to be pedantic, but I live in Bamber Bridge, and heard the tales many years after the event from eye witnesses.
    1
  31. Sad, but true. I cancelled my membership after my last visit.
    1
  32. So, in your world, there was no Operation Dynamo, Battle of Britain, Battle of the Atlantic, or campaign in the Mediterranean?
    1
  33. Do you think the Free French, or Dutch and Belgian colonies, supplied much in the way of military resources? The US certainly supplied aid but, again, no military support.
    1
  34.  @nickdanger3802  But with independent governments able to make their own political decisions.
    1
  35.  @nickdanger3802  Dominions elect their Prime Ministers in the same manner as they are elected in the United Kingdom. Whoever can command a majority in Parliament is accepted by the monarch, or the Governor-General on the monarch's behalf, as Prime Minister. The so-called reserve power has not been acted upon in the UK since 1834. It has happened in Australia, in1975, under peculiar circumstances, and not involving the monarch.
    1
  36. Really? How?
    1
  37. Unfortunately, the IWM appears to have fallen under the control of a group of people who have a certain point of view, and feel the need to produce propaganda in support of it. No, Britain didn't have slaves in 1940, or for over 100 years prior to 1940. My last visit (and it was my last in more ways than one!) was a most profoundly disappointing experience.
    1
  38. No such myth has ever existed. The role of Indian troops in North Africa and, later, in Italy & Burma, is well documented, and was so at the time.
    1
  39.  @Boppy-B-B  Which other countries? A number of refugees from occupied European states, but other than that the only substantial aid to mainland Britain from 'other states,' apart from small numbers of aircrew, were troops from Canada. Other than that, there one Australian division in North Africa from mid December, 1940, and an Indian division in East Africa.
    1
  40. Yes, I am sure an India under German or (Heaven help them!) Japanese domination would have been a far more harmonious place to live. Apart, of course, for the occasions when the Japanese chose to use civilians for bayonet or samurai sword training practice. Have you even heard of Nanjing?
    1
  41. I wonder if you would care to provide evidence of the British treating colonial people 'like animals?'
    1
  42. Lend Lease didn't exist in 1940, but other than that, you are correct.
    1
  43. Actually, the Bengal Famine had a number of causes, among which were the number of refugees from Japanese held areas, the inability to import food from those same areas, stockpiling by hoarders and, perhaps worst of all, the Bengal administration, which tried to minimise the crisis. The worst that could be said of Churchill was that he should have known what was taking place, but didn't. After all, in 1943, he had little else to worry about. You could also add the refusal of FDR to allow the transfer of merchant shipping, by the way. What is without dispute, except by those who choose to blame Churchill for everything since the Black Death, is that once he did find out, he transferred food distribution to the British Indian Army, and had grain convoys diverted from Australia to India. Sorry, I know this doesn't meet the required agenda.
    1
  44. Sadly, the people running the IWM have an agenda.
    1
  45.  @MrT67  There never was a New Zealand Division in the U.K. The only Commonwealth Division in Britain in 1940 was Canadian. There was an Indian and an Australian Division in North Africa from late 1940.
    1
  46.  @Boppy-B-B  Facts don't really seem to concern you over much. The only substantial Commonwealth ground forces in Britain in 1940, other than the British of course, was a Canadian division. Commonwealth & Empire forces did arrive in North Africa, but only from late 1940 - 1941.
    1
  47. The Soviets played a major part in the war. After being attacked by their 'friends.'
    1
  48. You would actually struggle to find Britain in military confrontation with Germany (or Prussia) prior to 1914. By the way, the suggestion that Britain (or, I believe it is said, Churchill) engineered the Bengal famine is not supported by any facts from the time, but only by subsequent propaganda. Could you perhaps explain why Churchill, or anyone else, would seek to risk mass rebellion in India when there were 2.5 million Indians (none conscripted, by the way) under arms?
    1
  49. Actually, around 57,000 Scots died in WW2. Coal production was essential to the war economy in WW2. Haven't you heard of the Bevin Boys? Miners in general were discouraged from joining up, as were other workers in essential industries. The rest of your post is incomprehensible.,
    1
  50. Sadly, I found myself obliged not to renew my membership after my last visit. George Orwell made a pertinent comment, which does still have some relevance to these people :- ‘England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a poor box. All through the critical years many left-wingers were chipping away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometimes squashily pacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always anti-British’.
    1
  51.  @nigelraporam6917  Bullshit. What ethnic cleansing?
    1
  52.  @bubiruski8067  Apart from the fact that your post doesn't make sense, hasn't it occurred to you that the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the German declaration of war, might just possibly have influenced the US entry into WW2, rather than the British?
    1
  53. When British law related to Commonwealth-born residents, which had given Spike a secure place in the UK, changed, he applied, in 1960, for a British passport. The application was refused, partly because he would not swear an Oath of Allegiance. Spike could have become a British citizen, simply by taking the oath.
    1
  54.  @Boppy-B-B  Actually, the Tobruk garrison was originally 9th Australian Division, supported by (British) 3rd Armoured Brigade. The only Indian troops seem to have been a small contingent from the 18 Indian Cavalry Regiment, attached to 3rd Armoured Brigade. From mid August, the Australians were lifted out by the Royal Navy, and replaced by the Polish Carpathian Brigade, 70th (British) Infantry Division, & 4th Royal Tank Regiment, who were eventually relieved during Operation Crusader. When Tobruk fell in June, 1942, the defences had been allowed to fall into disrepair, and 2nd South African Division could not hold them.
    1
  55.  @TheTfrules  You should visit the museum before making such comments.
    1
  56.  @TheTfrules  Perhaps you might also consider looking up the qualifications of the people presenting the video before calling someone a 'numbnut' for having an opinion which, evidently, differs from your own and is not, therefore, worthy of respect. I also have reservations about the quality of this presentation. Presumably I am also, therefore, a 'numbnut' despite my First in Modern History?
    1
  57. The US didn't 'give' large numbers of destroyers. The British were offered fifty elderly warships which they used as convoy escorts, once they had refitted them. They were paid for.
    1
  58. How, exactly?
    1
  59. Actually, the British were outproducing the Germans in aircraft, and especially in fighters, from mid 1940 onwards. Moreover, the main problem for the Germans was not the RAF, but the Royal Navy.
    1
  60.  @Boppy-B-B  Perhaps you could explain what motivated Canada, Australia, New Zealand (and South Africa by the way) to join the vile tyrannical British in a war against Hitler? The convoys crossed the Atlantic as successfully as they did because of the Royal Navy's Escort Groups. Canada did indeed play an increasing role, but not until 1942. The Japanese did not seek to invade India, but to carry out a major incursion which would disrupt allied supply lines to China. Doubtless you won't have heard of Operation U-GO, the 85,000 Japanese troops committed to it, or the 60,000 or so Japanese troops killed, wounded, or missing from the disaster that unfolded.
    1
  61. Alternatively, many might simply be better educated than you are?
    1
  62. Always nice to read a post from an academic.
    1
  63. The IWM staff have, sadly, an 'agenda' and facts which do not meet this are discarded.
    1
  64. Actually, discussions about Indian independence began well before WW2, and, almost uniquely, the British Empire was voluntarily dismantled.
    1
  65.  @Boppy-B-B  Is your attention span so short that the 'and its Commonwealth' passed you by? Indeed the Labour government began accelerating the end of Empire. It also helped with the dismantling of Poland by forcibly deporting Polish troops to Soviet Russia, in order for genial Uncle Joe to execute them.
    1
  66.  @Boppy-B-B  Only if you are a revisionist, with an axe to grind and an agenda to pursue. The Bengal Famine had a number of causes, among which were the number of refugees from Japanese held areas, the inability to import food from those same areas, stockpiling by hoarders and, perhaps worst of all, the Bengal administration, which tried to minimise the crisis. The worst that could be said of Churchill was that he should have known what was taking place, but didn't. After all, in 1943, he had little else to worry about. You could also add the refusal of FDR to allow the transfer of merchant shipping, by the way. What is without dispute, except by those who choose to blame Churchill for everything since the Black Death, is that once he did find out, he transferred food distribution to the British Indian Army, and had grain convoys diverted from Australia to India. I assume, of course, that you won't believe any of this, as it doesn't suit the agenda.
    1
  67. I think they do, but just don't want to!
    1
  68. Actually, the Bengal Famine had a number of causes, among which were the number of refugees from Japanese held areas, the inability to import food from those same areas, stockpiling by hoarders and, perhaps worst of all, the Bengal administration, which tried to minimise the crisis. The worst that could be said of Churchill was that he should have known what was taking place, but didn't. After all, in 1943, he had little else to worry about. You could also add the refusal of FDR to allow the transfer of merchant shipping, by the way. What is without dispute, except by those who choose to blame Churchill for everything since the Black Death, is that once he did find out, he transferred food distribution to the British Indian Army, and had grain convoys diverted from Australia to India. The Singapore disaster was a direct result of the fact that a situation existed in 1940-2 for which no pre-war planning could have prepared. The assumption was that a war with Germany would be fought with the support of France, who would take on the bulk of the fighting on land, whilst the French Fleet would play a significant role. Indeed, had France not collapsed, Italy may well have remained neutral. As a result, the British, never a significant land power, were obliged to attempt, with insufficient military resources to meet the new situation, to find ships and men to defend Britain, protect the Atlantic supply lines, and prevent axis control of the Mediterranean. The Far East, not at war until December, 1941, was, inevitably, starved of resources.
    1
  69. Yes. Blame the awful Ted Heath!
    1
  70. Nonsense. Simply look for yourself at the composition of the BEF. Then look at the Order of Battle for Operation Compass. The only Indian troops at the time were in East Africa. Non-British pilots, whether from the Commonwealth or outside it, are detailed in full in almost every account of the Battle of Britain currently available.
    1
  71. Last time I looked, the British didn't set up special facilities in order to exterminate several million people, nor did they deport hundreds of thousands for use as forced labour, nor did they carry out a series of military invasions of other countries. Perhaps you could list the dates and details of those many occasions when British troops brutally stormed ashore and imposed their tyrannical will upon smiling, peace loving, locals?
    1