eCharcha.Com   Support eCharcha.Com. Click on sponsor ad to shop online!

Advertise Here

Go Back   eCharcha.Com > eCharcha Lounge > SoapBox

Notices

SoapBox Speak up, speak on, speak your heart out!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 29th, 2017, 10:01 AM
kalidas's Avatar
kalidas kalidas is offline
Super eCharchan
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Caves of Karakoram
Posts: 3,485
kalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond repute
Untold story of India's Independence

We all know that India got Independence from Britain in Aug 15th 1947; splitting British India into India and Pakistan. We give all the credit to Indian National Congress for the freedom struggle. While there may be truth to it, but I doubt whether it's the full truth. The 'weapons' we used were 'truth' and 'non-violence'. How do you negotiate independence with a war-hardened, racist mofo like Winston Churchill using petty bs like truth and non violence? It's like taking a pocket knife to a machine gun battle.

So, if our 'freedom struggle' wasn't the core reason for our independence, what could it be? Here's my $0.02 conspiracy theory.

In 1939, Germany invaded Poland and started World War 2. It subsequently went on to conquer (along with Italy) all of Europe and had a pretty darn successful invasion campaign against Russia; until Russia finally came back.

In the first few years of WWII, Germany launched a hugely successful war campaign. They declared war on Britain. They bombed the crap out of british cities and ships. British were desperate. Their only viable savior was the United States. The US did not want to get involved in another war in Europe. But Churchill was a great statesman and got Franklin Roosevelt to support them financially and share military weapons (ships, tanks, planes, technology, etc.)

America was always a bit skeptical about the British. They didn't want the British to USE them to drive away Germany and then expand it's own imperial territories.

on Aug 14th, 1941, the US and Britain signed the Atlantic Charter. "The Charter stated the ideal goals of the war – no territorial aggrandizement; no territorial changes made against the wishes of the people, self-determination; restoration of self-government to those deprived of it; reduction of trade restrictions; global cooperation to secure better economic and social conditions for all; freedom from fear and want; freedom of the seas; and abandonment of the use of force, as well as disarmament of aggressor nations." (from Wikipedia).

Roosevelt (President) and Henry Wallace (Vice President) were very supportive of an independent India. Churchill did not want to discuss India with the Americans.

Then Japan attacked British territories. Malaysia, Singapore and Burma fell to Japan. The captured Indian army defected to the Japanese and formed the Indian National Army and were helping Japan. Indian Army folks were defecting.

The British were sweating bricks. Under pressure from the US, the British appointed Stafford Cripps - a highly left-leaning politician - to negotiate self determination for India. He assured India's independence after the war, but with full support during the war. Gandhi wanted full control during the war. Negotiations failed. Shit broke loose.

Churchill pretty much sidelined Cripps, even though he was quite popular in Britain. Gandhi lauched Quit India movement, but the British rounded them all up and threw their ass in jail and kept them there all through the war. Nothing productive came out of the INC during the time the British were most vulnerable. They wrote some letters and articles, but in the war between pen and sword, sword won!

Japan bombed Pearl Harbon in Dec 1941 and the US got into the war. After that, US did not want to meddle in British internal politics while the Allies were embroiled in the war.

After the war was over, the British tried to regain their foothold in India somewhat. Britain suffered immensely during the war. Cities had been bombed intensely by the German V1 and V2 bombs. Their army, navy and airforce were severely weakened.

In India, headaches mounted with the Indian National Army trials and the Royal Indian Navy mutiny.

Atlee became Prime Minister and decided it was time to pull out. They raped the country by pillaging from Indian coffers and princely states, cut up the country into 2 parts - specifically Punjab and Bengal, and left the country in tatters.

INC conveniently walked to the podium and claimed all the glory.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old August 29th, 2017, 10:28 AM
Sane Less's Avatar
Sane Less Sane Less is offline
Dead On Arrival is back
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 17,110
Sane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond reputeSane Less has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

Very plausible
__________________
-----------------------------------------------

"Kisi ne sahi kaha zindagi kutti cheez hai. You live life without a care in the world not realizing that life is building a heavy load of trash that it dumps on you one fine day, breaking your back." - saneless
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old August 29th, 2017, 11:57 AM
log1iszero log1iszero is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 786
log1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud of
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

British was occupying others so many nations , and after their economy collapsed after the WW-2 and due to the lost management and efficient command/orders and survival from the UK head office, the troops their management and maintenance,. providing all powers and necessities to all its colonel and battens,.. al system had failed their economy collapsed.. so not only India , I guess they pulled out from other 8-9 nations too, one by one,.. !
Indirectly we got freedom due to Hitler and not congress or Gandhi or his ahinsa movement or any,.. ! 1942’s quit India movement had already failed,… Karnge ya Marenge ( do or die ) ( uus ne sirf, hamaari hi maari ! ) had also failed,. long ago,.. Subhas ji was also died/disappeared, 2 around yrs before , we got independence,.. so he was also not a so threat to British to make them to leave,…

Britush left due to their own reasons of collapse ,……and Gandhi and congress and Nehru,.. all bull-shitted,….. that we brought the independence,…

British,… put a fire of Indo-pak separation,
also they intervened and pressed on ambedkar and Nehru to make constitution in a certain way,….
Also,.. they did not organize the proper departure of Pakistanis, and hence all hay-wire and hindu-muslims killed each other in so many lakhs at the time of departure,.. ( must had seen movie : Gaddar )

So, british killed us in 3-4 different ways, indirectly,…

Gandhis’ movement of ( charkha, self-woven clothes / Khadi, and picketing of foreign clothes or “ Videshi cloth ki Holi, Quit India , Do or Die movement,..
“ everything had failed and nthg had worked so effective,..

In short, British left due to their own collapse and their own reasons of Fall,… and Indirectly , Hitler, brought us the independence,… rest all Congress and Gandhi, Nehru, Bose ,… is all lie,.. no1 compelled them to that level, that they had to leave,… Subhash ji even died 2 yrs before the independence,.. so there was no reason for British to be afraid of him,… Gandhi, Nehru were all jokes and chickens,..and indirectly licking the british’s arses,..! Sorry fact was,….. all chadarmods , 4 Barristers/attorneys, - Gandhi, Nehru, ambedkar, Patel,.. no1 trie dto save those three Faansi pe zule-Laal ! Nehru got killed azad, few says Boze and ambedkar were also his victims,.. Gandhi even used JP’s wife, to test his own Brahm-charya ! Lol.

This vdo says it all,…. A True Video,…

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE


Also need to watch other videos on “YT’ search box,
typing “ How Hitler brought Independence to India” J
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old August 29th, 2017, 12:20 PM
MsShaanze's Avatar
MsShaanze MsShaanze is offline
be badass
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 526
MsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant future
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

Add "Freedom at Midnight" by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre to your list if you haven't read it yet. The way they have covered the entire period of Independence is just amazing. For those interested in the events surrounding India's Independence, this is a brilliant read.
__________________
Let's get drunk & tell each other everything we're afraid to say sober
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old August 29th, 2017, 12:36 PM
log1iszero log1iszero is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 786
log1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud of
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

" At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom."

Wasn’ that truly idiotic what Moron Nehru was speaking,….. ! He even did not know what he was speaking,… !

Aaa bey gadhhe,.....… World is not sleeping,.. yr own home-country-people are sleeping,... because it’s mid-night over here,.. at rest of the places there is a day and the world is already awaken,.. not sleeping !
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old August 29th, 2017, 12:56 PM
MsShaanze's Avatar
MsShaanze MsShaanze is offline
be badass
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 526
MsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant futureMsShaanze has a brilliant future
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

Logi Kaahe maare re taana
Kyun banta hai sayana
Sweetie, tera drama machaye hungama
Tu mane ya na maane ..
Yahaan sab hai tere deewane
__________________
Let's get drunk & tell each other everything we're afraid to say sober
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old August 29th, 2017, 01:01 PM
BABU_HYDERABADI's Avatar
BABU_HYDERABADI BABU_HYDERABADI is offline
Hyderabad Wala !!!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 2,992
BABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond reputeBABU_HYDERABADI has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

British did not leave because they wanted to do good for Indians. They were worried about the revolt in armed forces and the presence of over 2 million trained Indian army who just came back from WW2.

Also they were worried about Soviet Russia, if they did not give independence Russians would have intervened and provided arms to revolt against british. Also british lost lots of young men of that generation to WW2. They were worried that if ever they were to fight another war in India, they would loose many more. british knew about the topography of India and they knew that they will never be able to conquer India in total if ever there is a rebellion in India.
__________________
An oft quoted Gandhian phrase is that if all were to follow an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, then the world would go blind. The counter to that is that if only some follow this and others don't then it is the non-violent who would go blind while the rogues will rule the world.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old August 29th, 2017, 01:28 PM
log1iszero log1iszero is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 786
log1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud of
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

I don’t think the "terror" about the battle-returned, revolt Indian army, made them to leave,....as they were at the end of the day, on their payroll and salary given. An out of Job and without food army can do nothing,…

The fact is,…. except 22 nations on Globe,...,
British has invaded almost all nations of the world, during that peak century,… ! But now they were not bale and capable to maintain their colonel in all nations,….They were not that many in numbers, even in India, …….but due to the strict discipline, good body structure and DNA in blood, Divide n’ rule policy, making the other communities to lick their arses-skills, commitment, judgment and management qualities, they were ruling. They used our own force in the police and building and construction, making rail-patari,.. etc,… And, they made all of our Thullas on their pay-roll with the command, powers and management,….
But they were ahead due to their strict orders, commands, discipline, commitment, judgment, management and art of getting the work done.

They never cared even for proper and peaceful Departure of Pakistan separated,… and wrapped up so fast, as they knew that this nation, no1 can handle except them,….. and today what we all see,.. what they had pre-assumed ! Look at our present Politicians and that's what they had exactly fore-casted, 70 years ago,... !

Bridges, rail-lines, school-system,.. and in few areas, they marveled the work. Later, soon after the independence, importing Iron ore, we made machinery and Cloth-Mills and the industrialization took place very fast,.. !


.

Last edited by log1iszero; August 29th, 2017 at 01:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old August 29th, 2017, 02:21 PM
sgars's Avatar
sgars sgars is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mid West
Posts: 7,489
sgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond reputesgars has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

Quote:
Originally Posted by kalidas View Post
We all know that India got Independence from Britain in Aug 15th 1947; splitting British India into India and Pakistan. We give all the credit to Indian National Congress for the freedom struggle. While there may be truth to it, but I doubt whether it's the full truth. The 'weapons' we used were 'truth' and 'non-violence'. How do you negotiate independence with a war-hardened, racist mofo like Winston Churchill using petty bs like truth and non violence? It's like taking a pocket knife to a machine gun battle.

So, if our 'freedom struggle' wasn't the core reason for our independence, what could it be? Here's my $0.02 conspiracy theory.

In 1939, Germany invaded Poland and started World War 2. It subsequently went on to conquer (along with Italy) all of Europe and had a pretty darn successful invasion campaign against Russia; until Russia finally came back.

In the first few years of WWII, Germany launched a hugely successful war campaign. They declared war on Britain. They bombed the crap out of british cities and ships. British were desperate. Their only viable savior was the United States. The US did not want to get involved in another war in Europe. But Churchill was a great statesman and got Franklin Roosevelt to support them financially and share military weapons (ships, tanks, planes, technology, etc.)

America was always a bit skeptical about the British. They didn't want the British to USE them to drive away Germany and then expand it's own imperial territories.

on Aug 14th, 1941, the US and Britain signed the Atlantic Charter. "The Charter stated the ideal goals of the war – no territorial aggrandizement; no territorial changes made against the wishes of the people, self-determination; restoration of self-government to those deprived of it; reduction of trade restrictions; global cooperation to secure better economic and social conditions for all; freedom from fear and want; freedom of the seas; and abandonment of the use of force, as well as disarmament of aggressor nations." (from Wikipedia).

Roosevelt (President) and Henry Wallace (Vice President) were very supportive of an independent India. Churchill did not want to discuss India with the Americans.

Then Japan attacked British territories. Malaysia, Singapore and Burma fell to Japan. The captured Indian army defected to the Japanese and formed the Indian National Army and were helping Japan. Indian Army folks were defecting.

The British were sweating bricks. Under pressure from the US, the British appointed Stafford Cripps - a highly left-leaning politician - to negotiate self determination for India. He assured India's independence after the war, but with full support during the war. Gandhi wanted full control during the war. Negotiations failed. Shit broke loose.

Churchill pretty much sidelined Cripps, even though he was quite popular in Britain. Gandhi lauched Quit India movement, but the British rounded them all up and threw their ass in jail and kept them there all through the war. Nothing productive came out of the INC during the time the British were most vulnerable. They wrote some letters and articles, but in the war between pen and sword, sword won!

Japan bombed Pearl Harbon in Dec 1941 and the US got into the war. After that, US did not want to meddle in British internal politics while the Allies were embroiled in the war.

After the war was over, the British tried to regain their foothold in India somewhat. Britain suffered immensely during the war. Cities had been bombed intensely by the German V1 and V2 bombs. Their army, navy and airforce were severely weakened.

In India, headaches mounted with the Indian National Army trials and the Royal Indian Navy mutiny.

Atlee became Prime Minister and decided it was time to pull out. They raped the country by pillaging from Indian coffers and princely states, cut up the country into 2 parts - specifically Punjab and Bengal, and left the country in tatters.

INC conveniently walked to the podium and claimed all the glory.
The Roosevelt part is from Oliver stone documentary you have been seeing
__________________
This is quite a game, politics. There are no permanent enemies, and no permanent friends,only permanent interests. - Some Firang
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old August 29th, 2017, 02:27 PM
log1iszero log1iszero is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 786
log1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud of
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

-- Copied --

Adolf Hitler, NOT Subhas Chandra Bose, deserves Credit for India's Independence


Dr. Susmit Kumar, Ph.D.

World War II had a profound effect on the colonial powers because it completely destroyed their economies. Although Hitler committed crimes against humanity, I give him credit—and not Gandhi—for India’s independence immediately after World War II. Hitler destroyed the economies of Britain and France to such an extent that they were no longer able to financially maintain their military forces, and were hence incapable of containing the burgeoning freedom movements in their colonies. It is worth noting that Britain was in such bad shape that it received about one-fourth of the total aid given under the Marshall Plan. Regardless of Gandhi or any other charismatic leader, Britain would have left India in 1947 purely for financial reasons, due to its wholly collapsed economy. After WWII, Britain left not only India but nearly all its other holdings, including Jordan in 1946, Palestine in 1947, Sri Lanka in 1948, Myanmar in 1948, and Egypt in 1952. For the same reason, France also had to grant independence to Laos in 1949 and Cambodia in 1953, and had to leave Vietnam in 1954. Had there been no Hitler and no World War II, it most probably would have taken another 30 or more years for India and some of the other colonies to achieve independence.

Another major consequence of World War II was that it greatly hastened Indian political independence. The highly publicized Cripps Mission that took place in India in 1942 was essentially a political ploy approved by Churchill to buy time for Britain and to try to assuage anti-colonialist feelings in the U.S.

British historians P.J. Cain and A.G. Hopkins described the hopeless situation of the British in India as follows:

By the end of war, there was a loss of purpose at the very center of the imperial system. The gentlemanly administrators who managed the Raj no longer had the heart to devise new moves against increasing odds, not least because after 1939 the majority of the Indian Civil Service were themselves Indian. In 1945 the new Viceroy, Wavell, commented on the “weakness and weariness of the importance of the instrument still our disposal in the shape of the British element in the Indian Civil Service. The town had been lost to opponents of the Raj; the countryside had slipped beyond control. Widespread discontent in the army was followed in 1946 by a mutiny in the navy. It was then Wavell, the unfortunate messenger, reported to London that India had become ungovernable [which finally led to the independence of India].

There is a saying that history is written by the victors of war. One of the greatest myths, first propagated by the Indian Congress Party in 1947 upon receiving the transfer of power from the British, and then by court historians, is that India received its independence as a result of Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence movement. This is one of the supreme inaccuracies of Indian history because had there been no Hitler and no World War II, Gandhi’s movement would have slowly fizzled out because gaining full independence would have taken several more decades. By that time, Gandhi would have long been dead, and he would have gone down in history as simply one of several great Indian freedom fighters of the times, such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai, Motilal Nehru, Dada Bhai Naoroji, and C.R. Das. He would never have received the vast publicity that he did for his nonviolence movement. Political independence for India was achieved not by Mahatma Gandhi, but rather by Hitler rendering the British Empire a bankrupt entity.

In fact, Gandhi’s popularity among the masses had decreased substantially already in the 1930s, perhaps partially because in reality Gandhi had no idea of how to bring about India’s independence. At the Madras Congress session in 1927, when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose, two other freedom movement leaders, succeeded in having a resolution passed declaring India’s complete independence, Gandhi was annoyed, and hence—only to cater to Gandhi—the Madras resolution was modified to request dominion status under the British the following year at the Calcutta Congress Session in 1928.

Subhas Chandra Bose was a genius with a superlative academic record. After only six months of preparation, he stood fourth in the prestigious Indian Civil Services (ICS) examination, which in those days was held at regular intervals in Britain. In his book The Indian Struggle, Bose described his first meeting with Gandhi in 1921:

I began to heap question upon question…The reply to the first question satisfied me…His reply to the second question was disappointing and his reply to the third question was no better…My reason told me clearly…that there was a deplorable lack of clarity in the plan which the Mahatma had formulated and that he himself had no clear idea of the successive stages of the campaign which would bring India to her cherished goal of freedom.

Bose was unanimously elected Congress Party president in 1938. The following year, he decided that the party should launch a nationwide civil disobedience movement, giving the British six months’ notice. With this goal in mind, he decided to run for re-election as party president. This was completely within precedent; just before his term, Nehru had also been Congress Party president for two terms. Gandhi, however, was not pleased. He threw his entire support behind Sitaramayya, another senior Congress leader. Despite this, Bose defeated him. Gandhi said publicly that the defeat of Sitaramayya was his own defeat. He then manipulated his followers in ensuing executive committee meetings in such a way that he forced Bose to resign from the party. Commenting on this, Aurobindo Ghosh, the nationally famous freedom fighter turned renunciate, stated:

The Congress at the present stage—what is it but a Fascist organization? Gandhi is the dictator like Stalin, I won’t say like Hitler: what Gandhi says they accept and even the Working Committee follows him; then it goes to the All-India Congress Committee which adopts it, and then the Congress. There is no opportunity for any difference of opinion, except for Socialists who are allowed to differ provided they don’t seriously differ. Whatever resolutions they pass are obligatory on all the provinces whether the resolutions suit the provinces or not. There is no room for any other independent opinion. Everything is fixed up before and the people are only allowed to talk over it—like Stalin’s Parliament.

Ultimately, however, Gandhi and the Congress Party opted for a “Quit India Movement” against the British in 1942 and he spread the slogan “Do or Die,” which in fact Subhas had proposed in 1938. The British government arrested all the top Congress Party leaders and thus killed the Quit India Movement before it had a chance to gather steam. It fizzled out entirely within a matter of months.

Although Bose’s Indian National Army (INA), which drew its cadre from Indian POW’s in Japanese camps and fought along with Japanese forces on India’s eastern front towards the end of the war, failed in its ultimate mission, indirectly it succeeded in causing the British to leave India early. When Japan surrendered, the British charged 20,000 INA men with treason. They decided to hold the trial in public at the Red Fort in Delhi. The first three of Bose’s officers to be tried were a Hindu, a Muslim, and a Sikh. This immediately united Indians of all three religions against the British. While the Muslim League was at that time fighting with the Congress Party and demanding a separate state for Muslims, on this issue it joined Congress in the now-national movement against the INA officers’ trial. Most of Bose’s army cadres were Muslims.

On November 21 and 23, 1945, a mass demonstration took place in Kolkata (Calcutta). Participants included members of the Congress Party, the Communist Party, and Muslim League. The police shot more than 200 people, of whom 33 died. Then the British decided to put on trial only those INA men who were charged with committing murder or brutality against other POW’s. However, Kolkata simply exploded when, in February 1946, an Abdul Rashid Khan (a Muslim) of the INA was given seven years’ rigorous imprisonment for murder. The protest began peacefully by students of the Muslim League, but later students of the Congress and Communist parties joined them in solidarity. Both the police and the army were called to put down what came to be known as “the almost revolution.” This time nearly 400 people were shot down, and nearly 100 killed. Since racial discrimination was rampant in the Royal Indian Navy, Khan’s trial gave thousands of Indians the excuse to mutiny. The mutiny spread to nearly 80 ships and 20 sites on land. This came closer to overthrowing the British than anything Gandhi ever did. The reasons behind Indian independence are nicely summarized by the esteemed Indian historian Ramesh Chandra Majumdar:

There is, however, no basis for the claim that the Civil Disobedience Movement directly led to independence. The campaigns of Gandhi … came to an ignoble end about fourteen years before India achieved independence … During the First World War the Indian revolutionaries sought to take advantage of German help in the shape of war materials to free the country by armed revolt. But the attempt did not succeed. During the Second World War Subhas Bose followed the same method and created the INA. In spite of brilliant planning and initial success, the violent campaigns of Subhas Bose failed … The Battles for India’s freedom were also being fought against Britain, though indirectly, by Hitler in Europe and Japan in Asia. None of these scored direct success, but few would deny that it was the cumulative effect of all the three that brought freedom to India. In particular, the revelations made by the INA trial, and the reaction it produced in India, made it quite plain to the British, already exhausted by the war, that they could no longer depend upon the loyalty of the sepoys [low-ranking Indian soldiers under British command] for maintaining their authority in India. This had probably the greatest influence upon their final decision to quit India.”

It was British prime minister Clement Atlee who, when granting independence to India, said that Gandhi’s non-violence movement had next to zero effect on the British. In corroboration, Chief Justice P.B. Chakrabarty of the Kolkata High Court, who had earlier served as acting governor of West Bengal, disclosed the following in a letter addressed to the publisher of Ramesh Chandra Majumdar’s book A History of Bengal:

You have fulfilled a noble task by persuading Dr. Majumdar to write this history of Bengal and publishing it … In the preface of the book Dr. Majumdar has written that he could not accept the thesis that Indian independence was brought about solely, or predominantly by the non-violent civil disobedience movement of Gandhi. When I was the acting Governor, Lord Atlee, who had given us independence by withdrawing the British rule from India, spent two days in the Governor’s palace at Calcutta during his tour of India. At that time I had a prolonged discussion with him regarding the real factors that had led the British to quit India. My direct question to him was that since Gandhi’s “Quit India” movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they have to leave? In his reply Atlee cited several reasons, the principal among them being the erosion of loyalty to the British Crown among the Indian army and navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji [Subhash Chandra Bose]. Toward the end of our discussion I asked Atlee what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to quit India. Hearing this question, Atlee's lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, “m-i-n-i-m-a-l!”
______________________________
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old August 29th, 2017, 03:01 PM
log1iszero log1iszero is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 786
log1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud oflog1iszero has much to be proud of
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

---Copied --


Subhash Chandra Bose ! What is truth ?


The Japanese agent Subhas Chandra Bose
I hold Bengalis in high respect. They are a highly intelligent, highly cultured people, with great contributions in literature, science, philosophy,social reforms, etc

Unfortunately, many of them have some blind spots. It is diifficult to talk rationally with many Bengalis about some personalities whom they have converted into icons or holy cows, e.g. Tagore or Subhas Chandra Bose. Even the slightest criticism of these persons invokes a torrent or barrage of invectives and vituperations.

I remember when I was a Judge of Allahabad High Court I was sitting with some other Judges, one of whom was a Bengali, at the house of one of my colleagues. I mentioned my view that Subhas Chandra Bose was a Japanese agent. This so infuriated the Bengali Judge that he started shouting and raving almost like a madman, and so I quickly apologized so as not to break up the party.
But why should Bengalis go crazy if someone rationally criticizes Tagore and Bose ? Are they the private property of Bengalis.?

I have already mentioned my view about Tagore on my blog justicekatju.blogspot.in in which I have said that Tagore was objectively a British stooge, who had been built up by the British ( through their agent Yeats ) so as to divert literature from the revolutionary direction Sharad Chandra Chattopadhyaya was taking it ( see his Pather Dabi ) towards harmless and nonsensical spiritualism and mysticism ( see Gitanjali, Agni Beena Bajao Tumi, etc ) so as not to harm British interests.

I had also called Bose objectively a Japanese agent, in one of my blogs.
Today I read in the newspapers that Mamata Banerjee has decided to throw open the state government's files on ' Netaji '.

In my opinion this is just a diversionary populist measure to divert attention from the real problems of Bengalis ( and other Indians ) of poverty, unemployment, healthcare, price rise, malnourishment, etc.

Moreover, it is high time for Bengalis ( and other Indians ) to make a rational assessment of this ' national icon ' ( as Mamata described him ).

In Germany, Bose not only hobnobbed with Hitler but even with Himmler, two of the most evil men in history, ( their photographs can be seen on the internet ) responsible for sending millions to gas chambers. He wanted to organize the Indian soldiers captured by the Germans, to fight along with the Nazis. But when Hitler showed no interest, Bose went to Japan and raised his ragtag 'Azad Hind Fauj ' to fight with Japanese support against the British army.
In my opinion Bose was a highly ambitious person, and he became a Japanese agent because neither Gandhi nor Hitler had given him any ' bhaav ', so he thought that the only alternative left was to ally with Japan.
The Japanese fascists used Bose in their fight against the British, but the moment his utility was over they would probably have bumped him off.

Does anybody think that the Japanese fascist imperialists would have given freedom to India if they had defeated the British ? No, they would have made India their colony ( as they made Korea, Manchuria and other parts of China, Vietnam,etc ) and looted us. If we resisted, the Japanese would assuredly have massacred our people, as they did to the people of Shanghai, Nanking, etc ( see on Youtube visual accounts of these massacres ).

If Bose was a great freedom fighter, why did he give up the fight against the British the moment the Japanese surrendered ? He should have carried on a guerilla war against the British, the way the Chinese Eighth Route Army fought against the Japanese. In guerilla war you fight with the weapons of the enemy, by snatching them from him. The fact that he did not do so shows that there was nothing in the man. First he tried to become an agent of the Nazis, but they rebuffed him. Then he became an agent of the Japanese, who accepted him as their loyal running dog.

Some people support Bose's alliance with the Japanese by saying that an enemy's enemy is one's friend. In the real, practical, world, this maxim cannot be of universal application. Moreover, one can understand alliance with Japan if there was a possibility that such an alliance could have given us real freedom. But there was no such possibilty. Even if the Japanese, with I.N.A. support had defeated the British, they would never have given us freedom, but converted India into their colony. The very nature of the then fascism prevailing in Japan makes this evident.

My assessment of Bose is that he was an over ambitious, confused person, who to satisfy his ambition and ego was prepared even to ally with the devil, like a Faust. It is high time Bengalis ( and others ) realize this



same thing about tagore..he would have not got the nobel prize if he was not with the british

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old August 29th, 2017, 05:43 PM
kalidas's Avatar
kalidas kalidas is offline
Super eCharchan
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Caves of Karakoram
Posts: 3,485
kalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgars View Post
The Roosevelt part is from Oliver stone documentary you have been seeing
I put 2 and 2 together. Oliver Stone did not talk about India specifically. But the documentary did provide valuable insight.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old August 29th, 2017, 05:56 PM
kalidas's Avatar
kalidas kalidas is offline
Super eCharchan
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Caves of Karakoram
Posts: 3,485
kalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond reputekalidas has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Untold story of India's Independence

Quote:
Originally Posted by log1iszero View Post
-- Copied --

Adolf Hitler, NOT Subhas Chandra Bose, deserves Credit for India's Independence


Dr. Susmit Kumar, Ph.D.

World War II had a profound effect on the colonial powers because it completely destroyed their economies. Although Hitler committed crimes against humanity, I give him credit—and not Gandhi—for India’s independence immediately after World War II. Hitler destroyed the economies of Britain and France to such an extent that they were no longer able to financially maintain their military forces, and were hence incapable of containing the burgeoning freedom movements in their colonies. It is worth noting that Britain was in such bad shape that it received about one-fourth of the total aid given under the Marshall Plan. Regardless of Gandhi or any other charismatic leader, Britain would have left India in 1947 purely for financial reasons, due to its wholly collapsed economy. After WWII, Britain left not only India but nearly all its other holdings, including Jordan in 1946, Palestine in 1947, Sri Lanka in 1948, Myanmar in 1948, and Egypt in 1952. For the same reason, France also had to grant independence to Laos in 1949 and Cambodia in 1953, and had to leave Vietnam in 1954. Had there been no Hitler and no World War II, it most probably would have taken another 30 or more years for India and some of the other colonies to achieve independence.

Another major consequence of World War II was that it greatly hastened Indian political independence. The highly publicized Cripps Mission that took place in India in 1942 was essentially a political ploy approved by Churchill to buy time for Britain and to try to assuage anti-colonialist feelings in the U.S.

British historians P.J. Cain and A.G. Hopkins described the hopeless situation of the British in India as follows:

By the end of war, there was a loss of purpose at the very center of the imperial system. The gentlemanly administrators who managed the Raj no longer had the heart to devise new moves against increasing odds, not least because after 1939 the majority of the Indian Civil Service were themselves Indian. In 1945 the new Viceroy, Wavell, commented on the “weakness and weariness of the importance of the instrument still our disposal in the shape of the British element in the Indian Civil Service. The town had been lost to opponents of the Raj; the countryside had slipped beyond control. Widespread discontent in the army was followed in 1946 by a mutiny in the navy. It was then Wavell, the unfortunate messenger, reported to London that India had become ungovernable [which finally led to the independence of India].

There is a saying that history is written by the victors of war. One of the greatest myths, first propagated by the Indian Congress Party in 1947 upon receiving the transfer of power from the British, and then by court historians, is that India received its independence as a result of Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence movement. This is one of the supreme inaccuracies of Indian history because had there been no Hitler and no World War II, Gandhi’s movement would have slowly fizzled out because gaining full independence would have taken several more decades. By that time, Gandhi would have long been dead, and he would have gone down in history as simply one of several great Indian freedom fighters of the times, such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai, Motilal Nehru, Dada Bhai Naoroji, and C.R. Das. He would never have received the vast publicity that he did for his nonviolence movement. Political independence for India was achieved not by Mahatma Gandhi, but rather by Hitler rendering the British Empire a bankrupt entity.

In fact, Gandhi’s popularity among the masses had decreased substantially already in the 1930s, perhaps partially because in reality Gandhi had no idea of how to bring about India’s independence. At the Madras Congress session in 1927, when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose, two other freedom movement leaders, succeeded in having a resolution passed declaring India’s complete independence, Gandhi was annoyed, and hence—only to cater to Gandhi—the Madras resolution was modified to request dominion status under the British the following year at the Calcutta Congress Session in 1928.

Subhas Chandra Bose was a genius with a superlative academic record. After only six months of preparation, he stood fourth in the prestigious Indian Civil Services (ICS) examination, which in those days was held at regular intervals in Britain. In his book The Indian Struggle, Bose described his first meeting with Gandhi in 1921:

I began to heap question upon question…The reply to the first question satisfied me…His reply to the second question was disappointing and his reply to the third question was no better…My reason told me clearly…that there was a deplorable lack of clarity in the plan which the Mahatma had formulated and that he himself had no clear idea of the successive stages of the campaign which would bring India to her cherished goal of freedom.

Bose was unanimously elected Congress Party president in 1938. The following year, he decided that the party should launch a nationwide civil disobedience movement, giving the British six months’ notice. With this goal in mind, he decided to run for re-election as party president. This was completely within precedent; just before his term, Nehru had also been Congress Party president for two terms. Gandhi, however, was not pleased. He threw his entire support behind Sitaramayya, another senior Congress leader. Despite this, Bose defeated him. Gandhi said publicly that the defeat of Sitaramayya was his own defeat. He then manipulated his followers in ensuing executive committee meetings in such a way that he forced Bose to resign from the party. Commenting on this, Aurobindo Ghosh, the nationally famous freedom fighter turned renunciate, stated:

The Congress at the present stage—what is it but a Fascist organization? Gandhi is the dictator like Stalin, I won’t say like Hitler: what Gandhi says they accept and even the Working Committee follows him; then it goes to the All-India Congress Committee which adopts it, and then the Congress. There is no opportunity for any difference of opinion, except for Socialists who are allowed to differ provided they don’t seriously differ. Whatever resolutions they pass are obligatory on all the provinces whether the resolutions suit the provinces or not. There is no room for any other independent opinion. Everything is fixed up before and the people are only allowed to talk over it—like Stalin’s Parliament.

Ultimately, however, Gandhi and the Congress Party opted for a “Quit India Movement” against the British in 1942 and he spread the slogan “Do or Die,” which in fact Subhas had proposed in 1938. The British government arrested all the top Congress Party leaders and thus killed the Quit India Movement before it had a chance to gather steam. It fizzled out entirely within a matter of months.

Although Bose’s Indian National Army (INA), which drew its cadre from Indian POW’s in Japanese camps and fought along with Japanese forces on India’s eastern front towards the end of the war, failed in its ultimate mission, indirectly it succeeded in causing the British to leave India early. When Japan surrendered, the British charged 20,000 INA men with treason. They decided to hold the trial in public at the Red Fort in Delhi. The first three of Bose’s officers to be tried were a Hindu, a Muslim, and a Sikh. This immediately united Indians of all three religions against the British. While the Muslim League was at that time fighting with the Congress Party and demanding a separate state for Muslims, on this issue it joined Congress in the now-national movement against the INA officers’ trial. Most of Bose’s army cadres were Muslims.

On November 21 and 23, 1945, a mass demonstration took place in Kolkata (Calcutta). Participants included members of the Congress Party, the Communist Party, and Muslim League. The police shot more than 200 people, of whom 33 died. Then the British decided to put on trial only those INA men who were charged with committing murder or brutality against other POW’s. However, Kolkata simply exploded when, in February 1946, an Abdul Rashid Khan (a Muslim) of the INA was given seven years’ rigorous imprisonment for murder. The protest began peacefully by students of the Muslim League, but later students of the Congress and Communist parties joined them in solidarity. Both the police and the army were called to put down what came to be known as “the almost revolution.” This time nearly 400 people were shot down, and nearly 100 killed. Since racial discrimination was rampant in the Royal Indian Navy, Khan’s trial gave thousands of Indians the excuse to mutiny. The mutiny spread to nearly 80 ships and 20 sites on land. This came closer to overthrowing the British than anything Gandhi ever did. The reasons behind Indian independence are nicely summarized by the esteemed Indian historian Ramesh Chandra Majumdar:

There is, however, no basis for the claim that the Civil Disobedience Movement directly led to independence. The campaigns of Gandhi … came to an ignoble end about fourteen years before India achieved independence … During the First World War the Indian revolutionaries sought to take advantage of German help in the shape of war materials to free the country by armed revolt. But the attempt did not succeed. During the Second World War Subhas Bose followed the same method and created the INA. In spite of brilliant planning and initial success, the violent campaigns of Subhas Bose failed … The Battles for India’s freedom were also being fought against Britain, though indirectly, by Hitler in Europe and Japan in Asia. None of these scored direct success, but few would deny that it was the cumulative effect of all the three that brought freedom to India. In particular, the revelations made by the INA trial, and the reaction it produced in India, made it quite plain to the British, already exhausted by the war, that they could no longer depend upon the loyalty of the sepoys [low-ranking Indian soldiers under British command] for maintaining their authority in India. This had probably the greatest influence upon their final decision to quit India.”

It was British prime minister Clement Atlee who, when granting independence to India, said that Gandhi’s non-violence movement had next to zero effect on the British. In corroboration, Chief Justice P.B. Chakrabarty of the Kolkata High Court, who had earlier served as acting governor of West Bengal, disclosed the following in a letter addressed to the publisher of Ramesh Chandra Majumdar’s book A History of Bengal:

You have fulfilled a noble task by persuading Dr. Majumdar to write this history of Bengal and publishing it … In the preface of the book Dr. Majumdar has written that he could not accept the thesis that Indian independence was brought about solely, or predominantly by the non-violent civil disobedience movement of Gandhi. When I was the acting Governor, Lord Atlee, who had given us independence by withdrawing the British rule from India, spent two days in the Governor’s palace at Calcutta during his tour of India. At that time I had a prolonged discussion with him regarding the real factors that had led the British to quit India. My direct question to him was that since Gandhi’s “Quit India” movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they have to leave? In his reply Atlee cited several reasons, the principal among them being the erosion of loyalty to the British Crown among the Indian army and navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji [Subhash Chandra Bose]. Toward the end of our discussion I asked Atlee what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to quit India. Hearing this question, Atlee's lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, “m-i-n-i-m-a-l!”
______________________________
Just when I begin to stop reading your lengthy posts, you post something like this and totally redeem yourself!
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Story of Dawood--saviour of India's muslims Dil-hai-pak Life Abroad 7 July 25th, 2010 03:55 PM
The Shadow of the Great Game: The Untold Story of India's Partition dawizard Book reviews 1 October 6th, 2008 05:53 PM
Celebrating 55 years of India's Independence!! echarcha Taaza Khabar - Current news 42 August 19th, 2002 06:08 PM
Pakistan : The untold story - 1971 echarcha Taaza Khabar - Current news 0 September 7th, 2000 01:08 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Site Copyright © eCharcha.Com 2000-2012.