Churchill's Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II

Opiniones más destacadas de otros países

• Traducir todas las opiniones al Español

  

  R.Nanjappa

  5.0 de 5 estrellasCompra verificada

  Churchill the Villain!

  Calificado en India el 29 de marzo de 2014

  Most Indians have no reason to love Churchill, though they admire him for his leadership qualities during a difficult time in the history of his people. This is because he was a staunch imperialist who said famously that he had not become the first minister of His Majesty...Ver más

  Most Indians have no reason to love Churchill, though they admire him for his leadership qualities during a difficult time in the history of his people. This is because he was a staunch imperialist who said famously that he had not become the first minister of His Majesty to preside over the liquidation of the empire! But this is really not so bad- which of us would willingly give up power? The real problem with Churchill was that in his single minded pursuit of success over the Germans in the War, he was totally unmindful of the suffering of Indians during the severest famine and its aftermath, which claimed 3 million lives. Hitler killed 6 million Jews and Churchill and his war-time advisers caused the death of half that number! Do they not deserve a Nuremburg?. The other aspect of Churchill is his patent hatred of Hindus and positive encouragement for Muslim separation and his overt and covert support to Jinnah, even when he was out of power. Thus, Churchill emerges as a key element in the creation of Pakistan. LIke this, this remarkable book by Madhusree Mukerjee points out so many aspects of our history during the years of the World War II. This book is well researched and closely argued. It reveals so many aspects of our history during the closing moments of our Independence movement- which are not written about generally. Gandhi emerges as a poor leader in a crisis- how he was bullied and outwitted by Churchill, how artless he was in declaring Quit India and giving the slogan 'Do or Die'- without telling exactly what the people should do! We also learn how revolutionaries kept to non-violence under the severest provocations, how they fought and even administered on their own! Churchill too emerges as muddleheaded, stubborn with narrow views, believing what he would and not willing to learn, surrounded by advisors chosen for their personal loyalty. However, he was great enough to admit towards the end that he had been wrong about India. This book throws light on the role of Subhas Bose too, and his INA. It is clear that the British feared the impact of Subhas on the Indian army. Did the fear of Bengal revolutionaries propmt the British to decide to deny them rice-their staple grain? The clashes between Nehru and Jinnah, the way Jinnah developed his muslim separatism and emerged as their spokesman with help from the British are all dealt with. This is one of the best researched books on our history during the War. The prologue is a competent summary of historical developments leading up to the main theme and the 4 maps provided greatly aid our understanding. Churchill won the War but his life was a failure in the sense his cherished dream of empire got shattered. India got Independence, but Gandhi was a colossal failure as he could neither prevent the partition, nor the violence that ensued. Between the two, the fate of India was sealed! It appears almost that India became free in spite of itself! This book is very well written and no one can put it aside till it is read in full! But no one can read it without feeling deeply disturbed. This is essential reading for every educated Indian.

  Most Indians have no reason to love Churchill, though they admire him for his leadership qualities during a difficult time in the history of his people. This is because he was a staunch imperialist who said famously that he had not become the first minister of His Majesty to preside over the liquidation of the empire! But this is really not so bad- which of us would willingly give up power?
  
  The real problem with Churchill was that in his single minded pursuit of success over the Germans in the War, he was totally unmindful of the suffering of Indians during the severest famine and its aftermath, which claimed 3 million lives. Hitler killed 6 million Jews and Churchill and his war-time advisers caused the death of half that number! Do they not deserve a Nuremburg?.
  
  The other aspect of Churchill is his patent hatred of Hindus and positive encouragement for Muslim separation and his overt and covert support to Jinnah, even when he was out of power. Thus, Churchill emerges as a key element in the creation of Pakistan.
  
  LIke this, this remarkable book by Madhusree Mukerjee points out so many aspects of our history during the years of the World War II. This book is well researched and closely argued. It reveals so many aspects of our history during the closing moments of our Independence movement- which are not written about generally. Gandhi emerges as a poor leader in a crisis- how he was bullied and outwitted by Churchill, how artless he was in declaring Quit India and giving the slogan 'Do or Die'- without telling exactly what the people should do! We also learn how revolutionaries kept to non-violence under the severest provocations, how they fought and even administered on their own! Churchill too emerges as muddleheaded, stubborn with narrow views, believing what he would and not willing to learn, surrounded by advisors chosen for their personal loyalty. However, he was great enough to admit towards the end that he had been wrong about India.
  
  This book throws light on the role of Subhas Bose too, and his INA. It is clear that the British feared the impact of Subhas on the Indian army. Did the fear of Bengal revolutionaries propmt the British to decide to deny them rice-their staple grain? The clashes between Nehru and Jinnah, the way Jinnah developed his muslim separatism and emerged as their spokesman with help from the British are all dealt with.
  
  This is one of the best researched books on our history during the War. The prologue is a competent summary of historical developments leading up to the main theme and the 4 maps provided greatly aid our understanding. Churchill won the War but his life was a failure in the sense his cherished dream of empire got shattered. India got Independence, but Gandhi was a colossal failure as he could neither prevent the partition, nor the violence that ensued. Between the two, the fate of India was sealed! It appears almost that India became free in spite of itself!
  
  This book is very well written and no one can put it aside till it is read in full! But no one can read it without feeling deeply disturbed. This is essential reading for every educated Indian.
  

  Reportar esta opinión

  Opcional: ¿Por qué denuncias esto?

  Fuera del tema

  No es acerca del producto

  Inapropiada

  Irrespetuosa, con odio, obscena

  Falsa

  Pagada, no es auténtica

  Otra

  Otra cosa

  Verificaremos si esta opinión cumple con nuestras normas de la comunidad. Si no las cumple, la eliminaremos.

  Enviar

  Reportar

  Traducir opinión al idioma Español
• 

  savon

  5.0 de 5 estrellasCompra verificada

  Kollateralschäden

  Calificado en Alemania el 30 de julio de 2013

  Wer weiß in Europa heute schon, das in Indien, auf dem 'Flugzeugträger Englands', während des 2. Weltkrieges zehntausende Menschen prophylaktisch inhaftiert und tausende hingerichtet wurden um die Befreiungsbewegung niederzuhalten; das durch die erbarmungslose...Ver más

  Wer weiß in Europa heute schon, das in Indien, auf dem 'Flugzeugträger Englands', während des 2. Weltkrieges zehntausende Menschen prophylaktisch inhaftiert und tausende hingerichtet wurden um die Befreiungsbewegung niederzuhalten; das durch die erbarmungslose Umstellung auf Kriegsproduktion durch die britischen Kolonialgouverneure, verstärkt durch eine Naturkatastrophe, Hungersnöte ausbrachen, die weitere 100.000 das Leben kostete ? Das ausgerechnet Ghandi als EInziger vom Vorstand der Unabhängigkeitspartei den Kolonialismus für die Kriegsdauer für tolerabel hielt, während der restliche Parteivorstand standrechtlich ins Gras biss ? Prima Buch einer Inderin ! Leider nicht auf Deutsch erschienen.

  Wer weiß in Europa heute schon, das in Indien, auf dem 'Flugzeugträger Englands', während des 2. Weltkrieges zehntausende Menschen prophylaktisch inhaftiert und tausende hingerichtet wurden um die Befreiungsbewegung niederzuhalten; das durch die erbarmungslose Umstellung auf Kriegsproduktion durch die britischen Kolonialgouverneure, verstärkt durch eine Naturkatastrophe, Hungersnöte ausbrachen, die weitere 100.000 das Leben kostete ? Das ausgerechnet Ghandi als EInziger vom Vorstand der Unabhängigkeitspartei den Kolonialismus für die Kriegsdauer für tolerabel hielt, während der restliche Parteivorstand standrechtlich ins Gras biss ? Prima Buch einer Inderin ! Leider nicht auf Deutsch erschienen.
  

  Reportar esta opinión

  Opcional: ¿Por qué denuncias esto?

  Fuera del tema

  No es acerca del producto

  Inapropiada

  Irrespetuosa, con odio, obscena

  Falsa

  Pagada, no es auténtica

  Otra

  Otra cosa

  Verificaremos si esta opinión cumple con nuestras normas de la comunidad. Si no las cumple, la eliminaremos.

  Enviar

  Reportar

  Traducir opinión al idioma Español
• 

  S Wood

  5.0 de 5 estrellasCompra verificada

  "I didn't see much difference between Churchill's outlook and Hitler's"

  Calificado en Reino Unido el 4 de agosto de 2012

  Guess who said that? Perhaps it was Subhas Chandra Bose leader of the Japanese alligned Indian National Army? Or Nehru or Gandhi during an intemperate moment? Or some other Indian nationalist? The reality was that none of these Indian political figure made the comparison,...Ver más

  Guess who said that? Perhaps it was Subhas Chandra Bose leader of the Japanese alligned Indian National Army? Or Nehru or Gandhi during an intemperate moment? Or some other Indian nationalist? The reality was that none of these Indian political figure made the comparison, rather it was spoken by Churchills contemporary at Harrow, his accomplice in the rearmament debates of the 1930's and his then Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery. He said it with Churchills views of the Indian people, particularly Hindus, in mind, and with especial regard to how these beliefs impacted on British policies in India during World War 2 in general, and the Bengal Famine of 1943 in particular. This famine probably (as usual no one was counting with any particular care) cost Bengal and the surrounding provinces in excess of 3 million lives, and formed a brutal endpiece to Britains Imperial rule in Bengal that mirrored the famine that accompanied the Empires first steps there in the 1770's. If anyone has the notion to regard Amerys comparison as hyperbole they would do well to read Madhusree Mukerjee's "Churchill's Secret War". The centre piece of Mukerjee's book is the Bengal famine of 1943 to which she devotes much space to set the context within which it occurred, analysing the British response (stymied by the Hitlerite attitude of Churchill towards Indians), as well as measuring up the practicality and likely results of the options pushed for at the time by Amery and other officials. Beyond this the whole of the British policy in India during the War is covered, from India's War effort (paid for by the accumulation of Sterling balances in London for gradual payment after the war), the efforts to divide Muslims from Hindus, and the effects of British plans for the defence of Eastern India from Japanese invasion which made famine almost inevitable. Beyond the narrating and analysis of events is Mukerjee's accounts of the main actors, in particular Churchill (whose repulsive views on Indians are extensively quoted) and his all purpose aide Lord Cherwell whose views of the "lesser" races make one wonder why he hadn't just stayed in Germany during the Nazi period. This pair between them bear a major part of the responsibility for the negligible efforts at avoiding or ameliorating the effects of the famine. This negligence was not based on ignorance of the facts, but the fruit of their vicious racial beliefs with regard to Indians that makes Amery's comparison of Churchill to Hitler an apposite one. Overall "Churchill's Secret War" is the brilliant, well researched account and analysis of India's experience of the second world war. Fans of Churchill may be a little upset, but the "great" mans reputation is long overdue a reappraisal in the popular imagination. His policies and opinions on India were perhaps his most brutal, but they are not alone and chime in with his attitudes towards Arabs, whom he advocated bombing with poisoned gas, and other colonial peoples, not to mention the working people of Britain itself. Thoroughly recommended.

  Guess who said that? Perhaps it was Subhas Chandra Bose leader of the Japanese alligned Indian National Army? Or Nehru or Gandhi during an intemperate moment? Or some other Indian nationalist? The reality was that none of these Indian political figure made the comparison, rather it was spoken by Churchills contemporary at Harrow, his accomplice in the rearmament debates of the 1930's and his then Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery. He said it with Churchills views of the Indian people, particularly Hindus, in mind, and with especial regard to how these beliefs impacted on British policies in India during World War 2 in general, and the Bengal Famine of 1943 in particular. This famine probably (as usual no one was counting with any particular care) cost Bengal and the surrounding provinces in excess of 3 million lives, and formed a brutal endpiece to Britains Imperial rule in Bengal that mirrored the famine that accompanied the Empires first steps there in the 1770's.
  
  If anyone has the notion to regard Amerys comparison as hyperbole they would do well to read Madhusree Mukerjee's "Churchill's Secret War". The centre piece of Mukerjee's book is the Bengal famine of 1943 to which she devotes much space to set the context within which it occurred, analysing the British response (stymied by the Hitlerite attitude of Churchill towards Indians), as well as measuring up the practicality and likely results of the options pushed for at the time by Amery and other officials. Beyond this the whole of the British policy in India during the War is covered, from India's War effort (paid for by the accumulation of Sterling balances in London for gradual payment after the war), the efforts to divide Muslims from Hindus, and the effects of British plans for the defence of Eastern India from Japanese invasion which made famine almost inevitable.
  
  Beyond the narrating and analysis of events is Mukerjee's accounts of the main actors, in particular Churchill (whose repulsive views on Indians are extensively quoted) and his all purpose aide Lord Cherwell whose views of the "lesser" races make one wonder why he hadn't just stayed in Germany during the Nazi period. This pair between them bear a major part of the responsibility for the negligible efforts at avoiding or ameliorating the effects of the famine. This negligence was not based on ignorance of the facts, but the fruit of their vicious racial beliefs with regard to Indians that makes Amery's comparison of Churchill to Hitler an apposite one.
  
  Overall "Churchill's Secret War" is the brilliant, well researched account and analysis of India's experience of the second world war. Fans of Churchill may be a little upset, but the "great" mans reputation is long overdue a reappraisal in the popular imagination. His policies and opinions on India were perhaps his most brutal, but they are not alone and chime in with his attitudes towards Arabs, whom he advocated bombing with poisoned gas, and other colonial peoples, not to mention the working people of Britain itself. Thoroughly recommended.
  

  Reportar esta opinión

  Opcional: ¿Por qué denuncias esto?

  Fuera del tema

  No es acerca del producto

  Inapropiada

  Irrespetuosa, con odio, obscena

  Falsa

  Pagada, no es auténtica

  Otra

  Otra cosa

  Verificaremos si esta opinión cumple con nuestras normas de la comunidad. Si no las cumple, la eliminaremos.

  Enviar

  Reportar

  Traducir opinión al idioma Español
• 

  Nick D Kenyon

  5.0 de 5 estrellasCompra verificada

  Five Stars

  Calificado en Australia el 27 de diciembre de 2015

  Suspected he was a B....rd.

  Suspected he was a B....rd.
  

  Reportar esta opinión

  Opcional: ¿Por qué denuncias esto?

  Fuera del tema

  No es acerca del producto

  Inapropiada

  Irrespetuosa, con odio, obscena

  Falsa

  Pagada, no es auténtica

  Otra

  Otra cosa

  Verificaremos si esta opinión cumple con nuestras normas de la comunidad. Si no las cumple, la eliminaremos.

  Enviar

  Reportar

  Traducir opinión al idioma Español
• 

  Dr. Anand R

  5.0 de 5 estrellasCompra verificada

  Nice

  Calificado en India el 27 de septiembre de 2024

  Good

  Good
  

  Reportar esta opinión

  Opcional: ¿Por qué denuncias esto?

  Fuera del tema

  No es acerca del producto

  Inapropiada

  Irrespetuosa, con odio, obscena

  Falsa

  Pagada, no es auténtica

  Otra

  Otra cosa

  Verificaremos si esta opinión cumple con nuestras normas de la comunidad. Si no las cumple, la eliminaremos.

  Enviar

  Reportar

  Traducir opinión al idioma Español