Japan wins Kohima and Imphal?

[CalBear]

Uh, the actual Quislings (namely all the people who supported the British regime in India and the soldiers of the British Indian Army) didn't face squat despite six million dead in the Bengal Famine and millions more dead during Partition so I don't know where you're pulling this from. Wishful thinking-- maybe?



No, you're just taking the typical white/British view of things, which is a funny perspective to take given that the British are the local Nazi-analogues in question. Firstly, it's obvious that the only way the Japanese make it deep into India proper is if the British Indian Army defects after a series of mutinies; that is, the Japanese "invasion" of India becomes something more like a joint project, so to speak. In which case it should more properly be called the Japanese liberation of India. Furthermore, Bose himself isn't a pushover, moreover, he's a pretty canny politician. Any scenario where he wins the British Indian Army is probably a scenario where he pulls enough support from the heavyweights of the INA and maybe the Muslim League (Gandhi et al). The Japanese, tied down in at least two other major conflicts, at the end of their logistical tail, and with the strategic objective mostly fulfilled (secure the Burmese flank by liberating India) aren't going to be stupid; if they are, I give it two months before Free India and Bose declare war on them and chase them back to Burma.

There's a saying that any alliance has a horse and a rider, and in this case Bose would definitely be the rider. Or, to put it another way, why was Gandhi able to intimidate the British into fucking off? Because once India became more than a geographical place-name in the hearts of its people, it became something that the British military simply wouldn't be able to contend with. Imagine trying to hold a hostile subcontinent against a million man army, with a geography that in places favors endemic guerilla warfare. Anyone with a lick of sense knows it's just not possible. If the Japanese try it I don't see it ending any better for them than the British in 1947.

I am going to make the observation here: all the obviously Indian posters disagree with you and all the white? non-Indian? ones don't. I'm going to wager that's because WW2 is such a central part of your national mythos that it mandates you take a black-and-white view of things even when that view-- no, especially when that view is untrue. Don't confuse that with me saying the WW2 Japanese were sunshine and rainbows. They were monsters, did monstrous things. But the uniqueness of our world is that sometimes even a monster can accomplish a good, worthwhile end-- which the liberation of India from the British definitely would've been. And the British were monsters through and through.

Stand down.

 

[TDM]

Yes, I agree with all your points, I just was saying it would not be impossible Bose to be popular in India and try to be its leader

Right but your example of this (presumably the strongest one you could find) was not very good, suggests that it may be somewhat harder than you think

But this is largely because you are operating from a different conception of a 'successful invasion of India' than others in this thread are, which is an important distinction. You, and others, seem to be thinking of a successful invasion including large amounts of IJA soldiers pouring into India in the form of multiple field armies and conquering the Raj, and therefore religating Bose to a collaborationist and Quisling-like role in India. In this scenario, no doubt, the IJA would pillage India and commit atrocities that would alienate the population, you are correct.

Others, like @Password, seem to think that in a potential scenario, the Japanese are at the end of their rope regardless and it's unlikely they could go much further in any alternate timeline. Therefore, for success to be possible then Bose would have to inspire sepoys from the British Indian Army to defect and/or the Indian people would have to strike or wage guerrilla war against the British colonizers to win. In this scenario, the Japanese are the fomentors of the rebellion but hardly have the strength to ride the tiger so to speak. In this imagining, the role of the Japanese is minimized and the role of the Indian National forces is maximized. It would be unlikely for the Japanese to be 'committing war-crimes all over India' here and Bose would have the support and political backing from groups like the INC to stand on his own politically. Again, a very different scenario and it hardly shows support for war-crimes or Japanese forces.

I think we get that, but as pointed out many times now the army that is supposed to be the key to all this by suddenly turning around and supporting Bose was an all volunteer force. Now don't get me wrong the reasons for volunteering were many and varied and certainly not all based around love of the Brits. But that itself suggests that the cause of Indian nationalism is somewhat more complicated than "what Bose's coming let's go!"

I tend to believe three million people starved to death, due to the criminal mismanagement of the British Raj administration and the British imperialists in London.


If you look specifically at the underlined...

not so simple


food availability decline (FAD) and failure of exchange entitlements (FEE). (Mukerjee and Sen are in the latter)

1). There was actually food in India at the time but it was not moved around, pretty much because the regional governments (who by this time had a fair amount of self determining authority in these matters) were not keen on seeing food they felt they might need themselves leave their control. Their citizens were also not keen and there was certainly ground up resistance to it. Given what was going on at the time they can maybe forgiven for being a bit cagey. Pricing controls were dropped, speculation increased (but was reduced when inter province pricing controls were put back in 1943)*

2). The above came out of the fact that the '42 harvest had been relatively poor (but it also wasn't that bad there had been a worse one in '41 however two not great harvests in a row has a multiplicative effect) and more reliance was therefore placed on held reserves, but also intra and international import.

3). A huge amount of rice was usually imported to Bengal from Burma especially in times of shortage, only for obvious reasons Burma wasn't exporting much Rice in 1942/3, what it was exporting of course was plenty of refugees not to mention threat of Japanese invasion.

4). The army did not confiscate food in Bengal, it bought it's own food with it (it actually ended up giving some of it away), it later became the vehicle for more organised distribution.


However direct action (or inaction) by the British did certainly factor in:

1). the removal of boats (due to denying them to a potential enemy invasion) from a lot of the Bay of Bengal removed fishing as an option from many areas, additionally no compensation in the form of alternative food supplies was given (or well not very much anyway).

2), There was at least one shipment of food from Australia earmarked for Greece that could have been diverted (and was requested by the Indian colonial office). Now Churchill was an racist arsehole who most certainly would have prioritised whites over non whites (especially while fighting a war which he saw as a war of survival primarily for Britain and the maintenance of British power, but also culture), and he specifically denied this request. However it's not like the Greeks were just a little bit hungry. There were also other shipments of food around S Asia & SE Asia that could have been redirected but they weren't, Cylon was one IIRC, but again food stress was fairly wide spread at the time for obvious reasons. But I also think the attitude of "what those ungrateful traitorous indians** who were fomenting unrest (asking for independence), yeah they can stave", was well within his likely responses

3), Colonial driven food supplies were focused on War essential services i.e. when top down colonial office effort was there they prioritized workers making stuff for the war not Bengali farmers. There was a pretty poor assumption that the local markets would provide, without actually ensuring they would!

4). More generally a lack of willingness to step in when concerns were raised (Ok it's 1942 and there are other pressing concerns, but if you going to play at being the white empire that rules the world efficiently and well, you better step up).


So basically a mess, a mess not helped by a global war, disrupted shipping and economic movement and planning, and the enemy literally at the border. But still a mess that could have been at least alleviated by better action sooner by direct action from the British Govt and Colonial Office, and most certainly decisions where made to prioritise other concerns than staving Bengali farmers!


However lest anyone take this as a defence of the British empire in India, you want a really as advertised diabolical famine pretty much directly caused by mismanagement by the British in India and their economic policy? The earlier all India famines (esp Orissa 1863 ) is where to go. But even then there's a link as the lessons learned there by the British at great cost (a cost paid the Indians and not paid by the British of course) meant that they should have acted sooner in 1943!



*this isn't an attempt to blame the Indians, more to point out that there were other actors than just a top down Britain forcing India to do stuff, and of course it's not like the colonial office had completely lost all influence etc!

**not the word he'd have used I'm sure!

 

[jparker77]

Not at all, Bose was hugely popular in India due his efforts and during the trails of INA officials, India erupted into protests, Bose would not be killed, infact I see becoming a prominent leader in post Independent India if he survived
No one in India shares the idea that he was a traitor who needed to be punished, instead he was praised, Rightfully so, For taking a stand against the British

Working with the people whose official military policy was “kill all, burn all, loot all” is not “rightful” by any definition of the term

 

[McPherson]

Right but your example of this (presumably the strongest one you could find) was not very good, suggests that it may be somewhat harder than you think



I think we get that, but as pointed out many times now the army that is suppose to be key to all this by suddenly turning around and supporting Bose was an all volunteer force. Now don't get me wrong the reason for volunteering were many and varied and certainly not all based around love of the Brits. But that itself suggests that the cause of Indian nationalism is somewhat more complicated than "what Bose's in Burma lets go!"



not so simple


food availability decline (FAD) and failure of exchange entitlements (FEE). (Mukerjee and Sen are in the latter)

1). There was actually food in India at the time but it was not moved around, pretty much because the regional governments (who by this time had a fair amount of self determining authority in these matters) were not keen on seeing food they felt they might need themselves leave their control. Their citizens were also not keen and there was certainly ground up resistance to it. Given what was going on at the time they can maybe forgiven for being a bit cagey. Pricing controls were dropped, speculation increased (but was reduced when inter province pricing controls were put back in 1943)*

2). The above came out of the fact that the '42 harvest had been relatively poor (but it also wasn't that bad there had been a worse one in '41 however two not great harvests in a row has a multiplicative effect) and more reliance was therefore placed on held reserves, but also intra and international import.

3). A huge amount of rice was usually imported to Bengal from Burma especially in times of shortage, only for obvious reasons Burma wasn't exporting much Rice in 1942/3, what it was exporting of course was plenty of refugees not to mention threat of Japanese invasion.

4). The army did not confiscate food in Bengal, it bought it's own food with it (it actually ended up giving some of it away), it later became the vehicle for more organised distribution.


However direct action (or inaction) by the British did certainly factor in:

1). the removal of boats (due to denying them to a potential enemy invasion) from a lot of the Bay of Bengal removed fishing as an option from many areas, additionally no compensation in the form of alternative food supplies was given (or well not very much anyway).

2), There was at least one shipment of food from Australia earmarked for Greece that could have been diverted (and was requested by the Indian colonial office). Now Churchill was an racist arsehole who most certainly would have prioritised whites over non whites (especially while fighting a war which he saw as a war of survival primarily for Britain and the maintenance of British power, but also culture), and he specifically denied this request. However it's not like the Greeks were just a little bit hungry. There were also other shipments of food around S Asia & SE Asia that could have been redirected but they weren't, Cylon was one IIRC, but again food stress was fairly wide spread at the time for obvious reasons. But I also think the attitude of "what those ungrateful traitorous indians** who were fomenting unrest (asking for independence), yeah they can stave", was well within his likely responses

3), Colonial driven food supplies were focused on War essential services i.e. when top down colonial office effort was there they prioritized workers making stuff for the war not Bengali farmers. There was a pretty poor assumption that the local markets would provide, without actually ensuring they would!

4). More generally a lack of willingness to step in when concerns were raised (Ok it's 1942 and there are other pressing concerns, but if you going to play at being the white empire that rules the world efficiently and well, you better step up).


So basically a mess, a mess not helped by a global war, disrupted shipping and economic movement and planning, and the enemy literally at the border. But still a mess that could have been at least alleviated by better action sooner by direct action from the British Govt and Colonial Office, and most certainly decisions where made to prioritise other concerns than staving Bengali farmers!


However lest anyone take this as a defence of the British empire in India, you want a really as advertised diabolical famine pretty much directly caused by mismanagement by the British in India and their economic policy? The earlier all India famines (esp Orissa 1863 ) is where to go. But even then there's a link as the lessons learned there by the British at great cost (a cost paid the Indians and not paid by the British of course) meant that they should have acted sooner in 1943!



*this isn't an attempt to blame the Indians, more to point out that there were other actors than just a top down Britain forcing India to do stuff, and of course it's not like the colonial office had completely lost all influence etc!

**not the word he'd have used I'm sure!

Incompetence is no excuse for the criminal negligence or responsibility of the governing authority. Because you see, I previously underlined the real reason why that defense posted (^^^) is utterly invalid. The British government refused.

 

[Brahman]

Working with the people whose official military policy was “kill all, burn all, loot all” is not “rightful” by any definition of the term

It is not like British were Kind to Indians, as long as British left the Subcontinent, India would be happy, taking help from anyone, even fascists if necessary

Right but your example of this (presumably the strongest one you could find) was not very good, suggests that it may be somewhat harder than you think

Not really, You are still believing he would be treated similarly to Axis Collaborators in Europe, He would not be, he escaped from House Arrest in Kolkata as he was extremely popular in India during British India as such British wanted to control him, Japan is able to trigger a revolt in India, which if they win in Imphal and Kohima is way more likely, Bose had a real shot at being the leader of such rebellion in India

The real truth is the fact that no one in India cared who or what Nazis killed, as long as they killed the British, same with the Japanese

 

[TDM]

Incompetence is no excuse for the criminal negligence or responsibility of the governing authority. Because you see, I previously underlined the real reason why that defense posted (^^^) is utterly invalid. The British government refused.

Only you seem to think that only British people in India were making relevent decisions, as I pointed out many of these decisions and mechanisms were actually being run by others

on the refused offers of aid (I assume that is what you refer to with "The British government refused") read the wiki, again there is more to it than that,

 

[jparker77]

It is not like British were Kind to Indians, as long as British left the Subcontinent, India would be happy, taking help from anyone, even fascists if necessary

Not really, You are still believing he would be treated similarly to Axis Collaborators in Europe, He would not be, he escaped from House Arrest in Kolkata as he was extremely popular in India during British India as such British wanted to control him, Japan is able to trigger a revolt in India, which if they win in Imphal and Kohima is way more likely, Bose had a real shot at being the leader of such rebellion in India

The real truth is the fact that no one in India cared who or what Nazis killed, as long as they killed the British, same with the Japanese

There’s a big difference between “not kind” and “happily working with people who literally vivisect prisoners“. Imperial Japan, much like Nazi Germany, was beyond monstrous.

 

[TDM]

Not really, You are still believing he would be treated similarly to Axis Collaborators in Europe,

No? can you point where I've said that?

He would not be, he escaped from House Arrest in Kolkata as he was extremely popular in India during British India as such British wanted to control him, Japan is able to trigger a revolt in India, which if they win in Imphal and Kohima is way more likely, Bose had a real shot at being the leader of such rebellion in India

And you are still believing that a Bose coming into India along side the Japanese will be as popular as the OTL one. The point being that there's a huge gap between that and being treated like an Axis collaborator in Europe post allied victory

The real truth is the fact that no one in India cared who or what Nazis killed, as long as they killed the British, same with the Japanese

Only as pointed out that the Japanese are going to kill plenty of Indians when they get to India, and I'm pretty sure the Indians will care about that.

I know you got this idea that if Bose can just get to India with Japanese help then the Japanese will just disappear in a puff of smoke. But achieving the former make's the later unlikely*. The reality is the Japanese did kind of disappear in puff of smoke (or rather starve or die of disease) when invading India it's just when they did, so did the INA and Bose's chances.

Plus as pointed out Bose is not the only potential leader of Indian nationalism let alone a freed India


*The Japanese are also not stupid (they've been playing the anti western imperialism line with local nationalists for years), they can see what Bose really wants here. Look at the limitations that they put on the INA and Bose. They are not going to be the convenient vehicle for Indian independence you seem to think.

 

[Brahman]

There’s a big difference between “not kind” and “happily working with people who literally vivisect prisoners“. Imperial Japan, much like Nazi Germany, was beyond monstrous.

As I mentioned before, Japan if they become as brutal as they were in China would quickly become the villians of the Indians, but if they were restraint in their apporach, they could no doubt spark a rebellion in the region

 

[Brahman]

No? can you point where I've said that?

Sorry got mixed up with a old poster, but the point I was trying to make is that Bose was really popular then and now unlike axis collaborators in Europe

are you still believing that a Bose coming into India along side the Japanese will be as popular as the OTL one teh point being that there's a huge gap between that and being treated like an Axis collaborator in Europe post allied victory

Ofcourse Allies would no doubt want INA to dissolve and be punished for being an Axis collaborators, but what if a Native rebellion in India broke out, what happens then ?, Japan's main goal in India was not the conquest of India, but the removal of India from the war, if a rebellion did break out in India during this period, they would succeed in it, Bose could be used as a figurehead by Japanese themselves, but what is more likely is that they just supply his side and stoke the flames of rebellion in the subcontinent in order to weaken the British in the war.

Only as pointed out that the Japanese are going to kill plenty of Indians when they get to India, and I'm pretty sure the Indians will care about that.

I know you got this idea that if Bose can just get to India with Japanese help then the Japanese will just disappear in a puff of smoke. But the achieving the former make's the later unlikely*. The reality is the Japanese did kind of disappear in puff of smoke (or rather starve or die of disease) when invading India it's just when they did, so did the INA and Bose's chances.

Plus as pointed out Bose is not the only potential leader of Indian nationalism let alone a freed India


*The Japanese are also not stupid (they've been playing the anti western imperialism line with local nationalists for years), they can see what Bose really wants here. Look at the limitations that they put on the INA and Bose. They not going to be the convenient vehicle for Indian independence you seem to think.

It seems that you did not read my previous posts, but I have mentioned this many times in the thread that unless the Japanese retrain themselves from being overly Brutal, INA and Japan would quickly become unpopular, but if they were more controlled with the express goal of creating rebellion in Indian Subcontinent, a victory at Imphal and Kohima would be a great step forward
Bose might not have been the only leader of Indian Nationalism, but he was certainly one of the most popular one

 

[jparker77]

As I mentioned before, Japan if they become as brutal as they were in China would quickly become the villians of the Indians, but if they were restraint in their apporach, they could no doubt spark a rebellion in the region

Imperial Japan and restraint are two terms which simply don’t go together. They weren’t “restrained” in any of the other colonies they invaded; there’s no reason to believe they would be in India, no matter how eager some were to collaborate.

 

[Brahman]

Imperial Japan and restraint are two terms which simply don’t go together. They weren’t “restrained” in any of the other colonies they invaded; there’s no reason to believe they would be in India, no matter how eager some were to collaborate.

I agree with this, I have echoed this statement many times in this thread, Japan's best bet would be to trigger a revolt in India

 

[TDM]

Sorry got mixed up with a old poster, but the point I was trying to make is that Bose was really popular then and now unlike axis collaborators in Europe

no worries

Ofcourse Allies would no doubt want INA to dissolve and be punished for being an Axis collaborators, but what if a Native rebellion in India broke out, what happens then ?, Japan's main goal in India was not the conquest of India, but the removal of India from the war, if a rebellion did break out in India during this period, they would succeed in it, Bose could be used as a figurehead by Japanese themselves, but what is more likely is that they just supply his side and stoke the flames of rebellion in the subcontinent in order to weaken the British in the war.

I think the Japanese will want rather more than that even if they use Bose as a Catspaw. I agree they can't conquer India (but well that can't conquer china either didn't stop them trying along side their catspaws there)

It seems that you did not read my previous posts, but I have mentioned this many times in the thread that unless the Japanese retrain themselves from being overly Brutal, INA and Japan would quickly become unpopular, but if they were more controlled with the express goal of creating rebellion in Indian Subcontinent, a victory at Imphal and Kohima would be a great step forward
Bose might not have been the only leader of Indian Nationalism, but he was certainly one of the most popular one

No I know but as has been posted that is very unlikely. You acknowledge that, but then circle back round to assuming it happens.

The problem with idea that they just stop and go let Bose start his rebellion is that your still thinking in terms of the Japanese working to Bose's ends, but it's the other way round Bose was very much under Japan's thumb. Leaving aside how it happens the Japanese are not going to go to all teh effort of breaking through into India and then say "OK then off you go, you do your thing" to Bose.

 

[Brahman]

No I know but as has been posted that is very unlikely. You acknowledge that, but then circle back round to assuming it happens.

The problem with idea that they just stop and go let Bose start his rebellion is that your still thinking in terms of the Japanese working to Bose's ends, but it's the other way round Bose was very much under Japan's thumb. Leaving aside how it happens the Japanese are not going to go to all teh effort of breaking through into India and then say "OK then off you go, you do your thing" to Bose

Japan was no doubt insane during this period, but would they be Insane enough to launch a fullscale invasion of India ?

 

[TDM]

Japan was no doubt insane during this period, but would they be Insane enough to launch a fullscale invasion of India ?

No but again there's a big gap between a full scale invasion to conquer everything from Shri Lanka to the Hindu Kush, and giving Bose the keys to the kingdom

 

[Darrenb209]

Japan was no doubt insane during this period, but would they be Insane enough to launch a fullscale invasion of India ?

I'm going to be honest. Yes. Yes, they would.

Them starting a War with China? That was an insane war they had no real expectations to win. Then on top of that, they started a war with the Dutch and the British and then later the Americans all at the same time.

Imperial Japan was an incredibly factionalised place by all accounts. Even if there were some sane groups opposing it, others would support it simply because those groups were opposing it.

And the IJA pretty much ran on three things, Audacity, War Crimes and Denial.

So yes, I can honestly see Japan adding yet another impossible to win theatre to their situation. It never stopped them before.

The question isn't would they, it's could they. And for the purpose of any discussion of a major breakthrough into India you're already handwaving that since it's basically ASB.

 

[Brahman]

No but again there's a big gap between a full scale invasion to conquer everything from Shri Lanka to the Hindu Kush, and giving Bose the keys to the kingdom

So till where do you think they might go ? Perhaps till Bodh Gaya to claim birthplace of Buddha

 

[Brahman]

I'm going to be honest. Yes. Yes, they would.

Them starting a War with China? That was an insane war they had no real expectations to win. Then on top of that, they started a war with the Dutch and the British and then later the Americans all at the same time.

Imperial Japan was an incredibly factionalised place by all accounts. Even if there were some sane groups opposing it, others would support it simply because those groups were opposing it.

And the IJA pretty much ran on three things, Audacity, War Crimes and Denial.

So yes, I can honestly see Japan adding yet another impossible to win theatre to their situation. It never stopped them before.

The question isn't would they, it's could they. And for the purpose of any discussion of a major breakthrough into India you're already handwaving that since it's basically ASB.

Even though Japan started wars with all those countries, it was with the express goal to dominate Pacific Ocean and all those countries were in they way, But India does not aid them in this goal in anyway

But maybe, what if a Radical Buddhist faction in IJA tried to penetrate deep into India in Order take control of the Buddhist sites in India

 

[McPherson]

Only you seem to think that only British people in India were making relevent decisions, as I pointed out many of these decisions and mechanisms were actually being run by others

on the refused offers of aid (I assume that is what you refer to with "The British government refused") read the wiki, again there is more to it than that,

I think you have not understood that when the crunch time came and FDR offered and Churchill refused, that was the pin the tail on the donkey responsible moment.

Since 1939, the United Kingdom had been drawing grain and manufactures from India for the war effort, and the colonial government had been printing money to pay for these purchases. The resulting inflation had combined with other factors to precipitate famine in early 1943. The following summer, the Government of India asked the War Cabinet for half a million tons of wheat by year-end. The cereal would feed India’s two-million-strong army and workers in war-related industries; if any happened to be left over, it would relieve starvation. The mere news of the arrival of substantial imports would cause prices to fall, because speculators would anticipate a drop in prices and release any hoarded grain to the market. Churchill’s close friend and technical advisor, Lord Cherwell, demurred, however: he erroneously argued that India’s food problem could not be solved by imports. In any case, expending valuable shipping on Indians “scarcely seems justified unless the Ministry of War Transport cannot find any other use for it,” he added in a draft memo. (In the final version, this sentence was changed to a straightforward recommendation against sending grain.)

Interesting that a scapegoat was selected to spare Churchill, is it not?

That Lord Cherwell considered the rescuing of imperial subjects to be an inefficient use of resources may be deduced from the drafts of a lecture he had delivered during the 1930s. Cherwell, who was of German heritage, was then known as Frederick Lindemann and was a professor of physics at Oxford. In the lecture, he outlined a science-based solution to the challenging problem of perpetuating imperial control over subject peoples. The professor envisioned that technologies such as surgery, mind control, and drug and hormone manipulations would one day allow humans to be fine-tuned for specific tasks. Furthermore, he postulated, at the low end of the race and class spectrum one could remove from “helots” (Greek for slaves) the ability to suffer or to feel ambition—thereby creating a lobotomized subclass that would do all the unpleasant work without once thinking of revolution or of voting rights. The result would be a perfectly peaceable and stable society, “led by supermen and served by helots.”

The best possible interpretation still does not release the governing authority from criminal and civil liability.

• A relatively bad harvest in winter crop of 1942, led to supply shortages.
• Occupation of Burma by Japan in 1942 resulted in restriction on rice imports from Burma.
• Restriction on inter-state trade of rice and other food grains at the time further aggravated the issue. This was lifted temporarily for eastern states but then put back again as the rice prices in other states also began rising.
• Hoarding of rice stocks by traders and farmers in anticipation of speculative rise in rice prices in future as rice shortage was becoming evident.
• No inaction on part of British authority to import more rice from abroad to control the situation.
• The event at the time was not declared as Famine, which would have allowed government to act on supplementary reserves. This was due to the fact that government didn’t have enough reserves to fulfill the demand.

I note, with sarcasm, that the potential feeding of the Balkan region in 1943, which is an oft cited excuse for diverting Australian grain shipments from India (American ships from the SWPOA) to the European theater, makes no strategic, tactical or real economic or political sense since the Americans had told Churchill repeatedly that there was no way in hell that THEY would fund, fight or BLEED for his stupid insane incompetent Balkans mania.

 

[TDM]

I think you have not understood that when the crunch time

Did you actually read the the whole of the article you linked?! (I think it goes a bit easy on Churchill personally)

came and FDR offered and Churchill refused, that was the pin the tail on the donkey responsible moment.


Interesting that a scapegoat was selected to spare Churchill, is it not?


The best possible interpretation still does not release the governing authority from criminal and civil liability.

Only not every relevant governing authority here is white and has a stiff upper lip, again read my first post on this, hell read your own link.
https://medium.com/@Prakhar__Singh/real-causes-of-the-devastating-bengal-famine-1943-daac8389495e

I note, with sarcasm, that the potential feeding of the Balkan region in 1943, which is an oft cited excuse for diverting Australian grain shipments from India (American ships from the SWPOA) to the European theater, makes no strategic, tactical or real economic or political sense since the Americans had told Churchill repeatedly that there was no way in hell that THEY would fund, fight or BLEED for his stupid insane incompetent Balkans mania.

The Australian shipment that was redirected wasn't feeding troops for the Balkans they were feeding starving Greeks who's famine had started in 1941 (why were the Greeks starving you ask? well ask the Axis), the rest was already addressed in my post and the wiki I linked to.

Did you get the part here FDR himself refused shipping for food delivery later on? (but again for reasons other than a ghoulish desire to see Indians die).