Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "The truth about Winston Churchill" video.

  1. 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.
    3
  2. 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.
    3
  3. It also, at the time the words were spoken, was rather accurate.
    2
  4. What did J. F. Kennedy say of Churchill? “He mobilized the English language and sent it into battle.” Admittedly JFK pinched the remark from Ed. Murrow, but I suspect Kennedy's opinion carries rather more weight than yours.
    2
  5. How is any of that relevant to anything?
    2
  6. As was Gandhi. Only an idiot would try to foist ideas from 2024 onto someone born in 1874. I imagine Don John of Austria, commander of the Christian fleet at Lepanto, would come into the same caregory in your strange world view.
    2
  7.  @iano239  Yet modern India for one, is largely a product of British influence.
    2
  8. Did Churchill personally send him down the pit? What an absolute bounder and cad!!
    2
  9. He was not involved in the Post War structure of the Middle East.
    2
  10.  @saba1030  Nonsense. Do try to break your programming. In 1800, the life expectancy in India was 25.4 years. In 1950 it was 35 years. In 1800 the population of India of India was 185 million. The population of Britain was 10.1 million. Are you really indoctrinated enough to believe the nonsense you have recently posted? By the way, by 1948 the population of India had increased to 358 million. Therefore, if a tiny number of Brits. (around 30,000 at the height of the Raj) were attempting mass extermination, they must have been extremely incompetent at it!
    2
  11. How was that, potentially, Churchill's fault? He became Prime Minister on 10 May, 1940 and, moreover, the allied plan for the campaign was determined by the French High Command, whose army hugely outnumbered that of the British.
    1
  12. Wrong. Most 'rational people' are intelligent enough to understand that the trends of 2024 cannot be foisted onto someone from 150 years ago. Gandhi, from the same time period, considered Africans to be inferior humans, and i dread to thik what you would say about Marcus Aurelius.
    1
  13.  @MissR-hn8be  I am sorry you prefer to ignore facts. Sadly, the infantilisation of society seem to be progressing rapidly. 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. You might try to ask yourself, by the way, why Churchill would have acted in such a manner when, without conscription, 2.5 million Indians had joined the allied armed forces? Did your indoctrinators not mention that? I appreciate, of course, that you won't accept any of this, as it doesn't suit the agenda with which you have been programmed.
    1
  14. I wonder how your, presumably 'progressive' opinions will be viewed in 150 years time?
    1
  15. Many Indians had similar views about Africans. Even Gandhi claimed that they were inferior humans who ought not to be permitted voting rights. Of course, these days it is considered inappropriate to mention that!
    1
  16. When did Churchill order the Commonwealth, of which Australia was a part, not to aid Australia? Do you know how quickly Australian divisions left the Middle East after December, 1941? Or how the Royal Navy, by fighting and winning campaigns in the Atlantic, Arctic, & Mediterranean, made possible the concentration of the US Navy in the Pacific, thus ensuring that Australia was never remotely in danger of invasion? Clearly not.
    1
  17. 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.
    1
  18. Sorry, but is Richard Toye really the best you can manage?
    1
  19.  @saba1030  Have you removed your original post? It no longer appears in the thread. Indeed, reading does help. It was of considerable aid to me in acquiring my First in Modern History. Unlike some, I tend to check my posts for accuracy, and the figures I gave you are accurate. You might care to check them? Or, of course, you might not!
    1
  20.  @saba1030  Just found it. Perhaps you lack the intellectual rigour to realise that your comment makes your argument even less valid? The population of Britain in 1801 is known from the first census. Even referring to India alone it rather demonstrates the idiocy of your claim. Extending to the rest of the empire (the states of which still overwhelming retain good relations with the country which, in your imagination, brutalised them and murdered vast numbers of their people, as even you seem vaguely aware) simply extends your idiocy into the realm of insanity.
    1