Officer of Engineers

Sorry, Tronic, you're not getting it. The 25 cents advantage stays in India. Once outside of India, it disappears. It doesn't translate. If I come into India, my $12 does not become 25 cents. It is still $12. Even if I buy that 1 kg, I will still have $11.75 left, it doesn't disappear.

What internet economists have been trying to say is that per PPP, India controls the world economy in 4th place. That is extremely far from the truth. Your 25 cents is still 25 cents no matter where it is on earth. The value of the product may change but that is the value of the product, not your money. You do not have $12. You have 25 cents.

__________________
Chimo

Officer of Engineers

Does that earn India a place over China?

Well, no, Canada was still a Dominion but we're getting off subject. And Canada committed more force than India. The point was that India's contribution to WWII does not give her any rights above the P5 members ... well, with the exception of France (and on that one, I have no idea).

*** sidenote: I did a search on Indian Generals in WWII, couldn't find one, could you help? ***

I don't mean to demean the British Indian Army but I find it revolting when internet warriors demean the sacrafice of others.

Blademaster

You will not find any Indian generals in WWII because there was a strong British bias against Indian officers.

You forget one thing: India was the largest tax base for the British Empire. The navy that the British used in the Pacific Ocean came from India. Virtually, India supplied the Chinese fprces against the IJA through the Burma supply lines. Not to mention stationing Indian manpower in the Middle East.

Still, I'd rather not have India take credit for WWII because it means that we accept the British occupation and rule over India and that is something I am not willing to tolerate. I will honor the sacrifices that Indian soldiers made but won't mind if others say that India didn't contribute much to WWII because that means India was actively resisting British occupation.

Tronic

Sir, I'm very lost. Ok sir, so comparing Indian $12 with Canadian $12; well then although on the world stage they'd be equivalent, wouldn't that actually mean that in India, the person with that $12 can do a lot more with that money then the person in Canada with those $12 can do??? Which I believe is already the case. The goods and products are cheaper, because the labour is cheaper, and hence those $12 in India can buy a lot more stuff then those $12 in Canada can buy. So in those terms, is PPP not more useful to calculate? Sir, i think it directly calculates the cost of living and compares how much the people can consume.

__________________
Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
-Touch The Sky With Glory

Tronic

Depends sir, a Communist country fighting for their own survival on one hand, and a secular democratic country commiting its entire economy and fielding the largest volunteer army to help Britain fight her war. Hard choice?

Sir, I believe the canadian constitution was drafted like in 1935 or well, somewhere in the 30s.... and Canada had declared War independent of Britain; India was automatically at war when the British Empire went to war.

Well ofcourse sir, we were part of the British Empire. Only pawns I guess. Demeaning Indian contribution aswell....

Not allowed. All Indian units were lead by British officers, because the British did not allow India to have its own head because of the fear of rebellion; like the previous Sepoy Mutiny.

Sir, it is not demeaning the sacrifice of others. It is simply that sir, India commited a huge amount of forces, one of the largest contributions in the commonwealth. India itself fielded 2.5 million troops, at the time becoming the largest all-volunteer force in history. Yet sir, Indian contribution is neither given great significance either by British historians or by Indian historians. The Indian army formed the third largest allied force to invade Italy after the US and Britain. Just read up on the Battle of Monte Cassino where we spilled a great deal of our blood. Burma, North Africa, were again some major theatres in which the Indian army took part in. And not to mention, that India's economy did provide the economic backbone for Britain and the Commonwealth. It has been the Indian sacrifice which is being demeaned, no one elses...

northface

Ok here goes:

And China fighting Fascism?? Nope that was not the case. Yes it was waging war against Japan, so was India waging a non violent struggle against the British, yet it committed 2.5 million troops against the fascist empires. Lets see now who helped China fight against the Japs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allies_of_World_War_II

northface

Yeah yeah..and mass starvation never occurred in Maoist China according to the ole China hand. I heard it all

northface

Yes The so called GREAT VICTORY in WW2 was over guess what? FASCISM.

What is China NOW? What has China been last 50 years?

Hint: A FASCIST state.

In my opinion China and France should be out of the UN pronto. India in. No two ways about it..

Officer of Engineers

*** sigh *** WWII China was NOT communist. It was Facist. However, again, does India rate over China?

Well, no, 1982. You're thinking the Statue of Westminister of 1931. However, read below for further clarification.

Not to diminish India's contribution but really trying to grasp India's contribution as a force. Canada fielded superior forces not only because we've sent more tanks, planes, and ships but they fought under Canadian command. Now, I know British Indian Army regiments did their share, did more than their share but did they fought at the brigade/division/corps level? And regardless if they're Brits or Indian, did British Indian Army Staff Officers (Maj or above) sit in on the operational planning?

And Chinese sacrifices? I can name the BInA regts in Italy. Can you name one single Chinese Army?

Officer of Engineers

EXACTLY!

Of course!

It's more than that. $12 is $12. 25 cents is 25 cents. 25 cents is NOT $12. The point at the end of the day, is not what you can do with your money. It's how much money you've got. Yes, you can do alot more with 25 cents in India than I can with $12 in Canada but we're not talking about in India or in Canada. We're talking the "4th most powerful economy in the world," and when you used PPP, that's hogwash. Try using that 25 cents is $12 bullcrap in any bank in the world and see just where that gets you.

Banks don't deal with PPP dollars ... and neither does the world economy.

northface

They fought at every level..

From the Battle of Monte Cassino

Africa and Italy

I could give you lots of examples..but to claim that the Indian Army's contribution is any less..specially your rude comparison with Canada is unacceptable. Planning part yes there were many Indian officers in all theaters. The Italian demining campaign was led by an Indian sapper. Planning any major offensive like the ones in Italy would require Officers and people familiar with terrain, troops. Burma for example, there were not many British officers and the terrain was known by Indians, so Indians would have been in the planning process. As for the comparison with China..yes China pinned down a lot of *** troops but it was the Indians who halted their western advance even as they fought in other major theaters of conflict over 3 continents. China possibly would have remained pinned down a decade more but for the ferocious end to the Japanese and German attacks on many fronts.

Give it a break. You'll come out scathed in this sort of exchange.

northface

Sorry but it's you who's twisting words out of context. I said according to PPP India is the 4th largest economy in the world. Period. I did not translate it into anything..you did quite deviously. And it certainly is not hogwash of any kind since economists do use that standard with some frequency.

Then the 4th largest Army i said. You made it to be the 4th most powerful..twisted words again. Yet I was wrong and you were right..strangely i found out it's not the 4th largest but the 2nd largest Army. And saying it's the 4th most powerful will not be too wrong too. Individually you cannot compare say the Australian, Japanese or Canadian Army to India, but these countries are part of a block called NATO. So we have 4 major Armed forces..NATO (most powerful), Russia, China and India. So certainly that would also translate into the 4th most powerful one too at the minimum. Whats wrong in that? Lets hear..i never posted anything incorrect. You did.

Tronic

Sir, correction, nowhere did I state India as world's fourth powerful economy. Just trying to understand this GDP-PPP thing. In terms of real GDP rate (without PPP), Indian economy rates 12th in the world. It is only when we take into account PPP, India rises to be fourth largest economy and China rises to be second largest.

Tronic

1.) Ok sir, but ironically, WWII was against Facism, not Communism.

2.) The Chinese got the UN VETO seat AFTER they had kicked out the democratic Chinese party onto a little island called Taiwan and had established themselves as a communist state.

That is your opinion. In my opinion, yes, India does rate over China on that certain stage.

Sir, why did the Canadians fight under Canadian command? Because Canada had established itself as an independent nation. The most obvious is when Canada declared war against the Germans independent of the British Empire! India, the Aussies, the New Zealanders and other British colonies were at war when the British empire was at war, they did not declare war seperately as Canada did. Sir, India suffered the most casualties then any other commonwealth country including Canada; India alone had 31 Victoria Cross recipients, far more then any other Commonwealth country. And did British Indian staff officers sit on the operational planning? No, simply because we were under the British flag. This cannot be possibly compared to Canada which had its own independent armed forces. You see, India was not a dominion like Canada was, India was a colony.



Chinese army was fighting their own war; Chinese sacrifices were for the Chinese only, no one else.

Officer of Engineers

*** sigh *** Again, no. The People's Republic of China (ie, Mainland China) replaced the Republic of China (ie, Taiwan) as the China UN seat and the veto in the 70s, the Republic of China was banished to Taiwan in 1949.

And Taiwan remained facist until the 1980s when their democratic insitutions came into being.

Not on the military commitement, it does not. The numbers are on the Chinese side. That is pure simple fact.

You're not understanding the question. I asked whether any Officer of the British Indian Army (regardless if they borned in the UK or India) served on the operational committee. I know the BInA fought at the battalion level. Did they fight at the brigade/division/corps level? In short, was their any brigade/division/corps comprised mainly of BInA regiments?

Edit: Come to think of it, there has to be divisions comprising of only British Indian Army. That's who took on the Japanese. Indian Majors and Colonels would've been on those operational committees. Ok, with this in mind, any bright names that shined out?

And that reduced their effect on the overall war effort how? Their impact is far larger than India's and that is something that cannot be denied. Simple question. What would've happen if the Indian National Army was re-enforced by half the Imperial Japanese Army?