Excellent post and comments! Trump has bungled the Iran issue and embarrassed himself enough, though he’s too vain to see it. He should turn the leadership position on the matter over to Netanyahu who knows more about Islam than Trump ever will.
Unfortunately, regardless of what the final agreement says, it will mean nothing to the Islamic leaders who are already showing themselves to be no different than the previous ones. They are willing to play the game of “negotiating” in order to buy time to rebuild and fully resume the jihad. Netanyahu knows this; Trump is naive, self-absorbed, and clueless.
What do you expect when you put a cowboy like JD Vance in any important position? To think of him as the next US President, every country in the world will take advantage of his incompetence.
India will support Israel even if no other country does. We love the Jewish people.
In case you’re surrounded by enemies totally, we will form an iron shield around your borders to protect you.
During the first World War, it was Indian troops secured and rescued Haifa.
The date was September 23, 1918, during World War I. Troops from the Jodhpur, Mysore, and Hyderabad Lancers (part of the 15th Imperial Service Cavalry Brigade of India) made history with a daring cavalry charge, capturing the city of Haifa from Ottoman and German forces. That city has remained under Jewish control ever since.
The Haifa cavalry charge is known as one of the last episodes of cavalry units being used in regular battle.
The Ottoman Turks and Germans were in their secure trenches with access to machine guns.
The Indian cavalry units charged daringly on their horses without any care in the world, wielding lances and swords.
It was s straight-up contest between medieval weaponry vs. Modern artillery.
400 years of Ottoman rule over Haifa ended under just 1 hour. Lots of German POWs.As India was under British rule in 1918, the Brits took all credit for the victory.
It’s only recently the Israelis have revised their school textbooks to name Indians as the liberators of Haifa.
I can tell you had India been independent in 1918, we would have taken care of that crazy bastard Adolf Hitler before he could play genocide games.
“I can tell you had India been independent in 1918, we would have taken care of that crazy bastard Adolf Hitler before he could play genocide games.”
How? India didn’t even have a blue-water navy back then. Facing off against Ottoman and German forces in WW1 would be NOTHING like facing the Third Reich — just ask the Russians or the Brits or the French — all of whom suffered defeat at the hands of the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe. India didn’t even have any tanks before 1948, nor APCs, nor an air force. 27 MILLION Russians were killed in WW2.
The so-called Third Reich were no match for Indian infantry units during the Battle of Monte Cassimo that eventually liberated Rome from Axis control.
The 4th Indian Division—which included troops from the 4/16 Punjab Regiment, Rajputana Rifles, and Gurkhas heavily bombarded entenched German paratroopers equipped with landmines, machine guns and aircraft support.
The Indians did lose around 3000 men but they eventually liberated the heavily fortified German military positions. Trust me, Indian troops were in zero awe of the Third Reich or Hitler. They just saw hin as a cartoon villain rather than the most feared man of Europe.
This was only in 1944. Had these elite units been utilized sooner, the war would have been over faster.
On the eastern front, the Japanese advanced through all of Asia including China, Indonesia, Indo-China, and Burma. But they were stopped right at the Indian border, amd beaten back at famous engagements like The Battle of the Tennis court.
In fact, Indian troops defeated the Japanese in every single 1:1 engagement. The only time they lost was when our British and Australian “allies” were like monkeys on the back, taking cowardly decisions. There was a lot of mutual resentment between Indian and British/Australian troops because their methods were long-drawn and ineffective.
On their own if deplpyed correctly, Indian troops would have broken the Japanese back, causing them to retreat from SE Asia.
—
The only reason you don’t hear enough of Indian velour is because of the white supremacists in the UK who wrote history denying credit to their Indian colony.
The only reason British left India was because they were scared of the Indian troops who were so far loyal to the Crown.
In 1857, Indian troops who were dissatisfied had staged a Sepoy mutiny leading to murders 9f thousands of British soldiers in India. The Brits didn’t want a repeat of that history so they decided to quietly leave by 1947.
The thing is Indian armed units had a sense of fleeting respect for their British overlords. But they lost it completely after seeing their superior British commanders surrender without a fight to the Japanese like it happened during the Fall of Singapore. No Indian soldier would have willi gly surrendered to the Japanese, of all people. Many bevame POWs only bevause the UK/Australian Commonwealth monkeys in the back were a cowardly lot.
The cowardice of British officers bred resentment and a lack of overall respect for the British nation.
This is the real history of India they don’t teach you in Western colleges.
India hardly fought the battle of Monte Cassino alone they only contributed one division to the battle and the vast majority of casualties were British and American. The Germans gave better than they got at the Battle of Monte Cassino, 100,000 Poles, Brits, Americans, Indians died there, but only 80,000 Germans. Germany had no air support at the battle of Monte Cassino, the Luftwaffe had already been defeated by the RAF and USAAC. The entire Italian campaign was nothing but a delaying action by Nazi Germany. The real war was being fought in France and Eastern Europe not Italy.
The vast majority of Imperial Japan’s forces were nowhere near India and most of them were in China — even at the bitter end. The IJN attacked Ceylon in the Indian Ocean and neither the RN nor India could do anything about it because they would’ve been spanked by the IJN.
Churchill did try and send two battleships to help out in Singapore — they were both sunk by Japanese torpedo bombers. The Singapore garrison was completely cut-off and isolated — no one could’ve saved them.
Imperial JP had no interest in India during WW2, but if they had, what could India have done against Japanese tanks, airplanes and naval units?
With all due respect and not wanting to sound like a history revisionist, there are TWO different versions of those events.
Both perspectives capture essential truths, but evaluating which perspective holds more weight requires separating the sheer scale of the conflict from the critical breakthrough actions, while directly addressing the historical erasure motivated by colonial bias.
See this constant bickering we willl have on this subject is precisely what the Indian troops would experience on a daily basis when fighting alongside our key “allies” – the UK and Australia.
We did not interact that much with the American GIs however they did use Indian air bases and ports. Our main friction was with the British unit commanders, and also with the Australians in the SE Asian theatre.
My point is the Brits and Aussies rmade very poor decisions (such as Ceylon which you rightly pointed out) that led to constant friction and casualties for Indians. Ceylon was our turf near Indian waters and culturally close to India.
However, the Japanee NEVER did occupy Ceylon. their air raids caused heavy military and civilian casualties and sank several British warships, including the aircraft carrier HMS Hermes. But the Japanese never launched any ground invasions of Ceylon. There were many air raids by Japanese on eastern Indian cities like Calcutta, and people died. That’s a separate topic.
My main point in all this is that it was a nightmare dealing with the UK/Australian troops on a daily basis. With “allies” like those Brfts and their convict descendants south of the Antipodes, who really needs enemies.
Anyway, back to your queries:
1) Momte Cassimo – You are right that more Brits died in Monte Cassimo and the oevrall war, but so did at least 3000 Indians.
For what? Liberating Italy. Why should we have bothered with that place? As much as we hated the Brits, we understood that destroying the Fascists in Italy and the German Nazis was the only honourable thing. We understood European civilians were suffering, and we pledged ourselves to help them out.
Plus Indian troops under various provinces and princely states had already pledged their loyalty to the King of England It would have been dishonourable to go back on that word.
The Indian version of this event is that Indian troops played the main role in breaking the Gustav Line. It is highly accurate when looking at specific, decisive breakthrough sectors during the final offensive (Operation Diadem).
The Core Action: The 8th Indian infantry division was tasked with the exceptionally dangerous job of forcing a crossing over the Rapido River. They did so under catastrophic German artillery fire, established a bridgehead, and launched the armored push that effectively unhinged the southern flank of the Gustav Line.
Concurrently, the 4th Indian Division (famous “Red Eagles”) bore the brunt of the horrific, near-impossible uphill fighting on the ridges surrounding the monastery during the earlier offensives.
Without the specific tactical success of the Indian divisions crossing the river and securing the high ground, the wider Allied breakthrough would have never happened without leading to more massive casualties.
You think the British commanders would thank us after we helped clear the passage for them? While senior Allied commanders like Field Marshal Wavell highly praised the 4th Indian Division, the relationship between the ordinary soldiers in the trenches was anything but friendly.
You have to understand the psychology of Indian soldiers in Italy. Most of them only fought because of regimental pride (izzat) and a direct oath of loyalty (namak) pledged to the King-Emperor.
The British “Tommie” (the working-class British private), however, was right in front of them. Indian soldiers frequently viewed British soldiers as undisciplined, loud, stupid. racist, and culturally insensitive.
Conversely, British soldiers often carried the deep-seated racial prejudices of the colonial Empire, viewing Indians as racially inferior “savages” rather than military equals. They saw us as natural fighters but intellectually simple, superstitious, and emotionally primal.
I get it the Brits often used terms like “superstitious” or “savages” to cope with their own deep-seated insecurities. On the sheer, vertical rock faces of Monte Cassino, standard British infantry tactics failed miserably. The Indian and Gurkha troops easily out-manoeuvered and outperformed the British units in the hills.
The British resentment against Indian troops existed despite the decisive breaking of Gustav Line which was physically and tactically impossible for the Brits.
For many of these reasons, the Indians used to taunt the Tommies accordingly, that “they lacked balls and courage” which led to frequent brawls and in-fighting.
Indian soldiers were fully aware that the entire British war effort in Italy was on life support without them, and they absolutely refused to accept the “dumb colonial” role. We hit the British Tommies exactly where it hurt most: their manhood and their military incompetence.
A standard taunt Indians would use is: “Without us, you could not have won…” This wasn’t just a taunt; it was an undeniable reality that Indian troops threw in the faces of British soldiers during arguments in the trenches and rest camps. The Indians watched British units stall, panic, and take heavy losses on the Rapido River and the Cassino ridges.
Sometimes the Indians would even laugh while the British were taking a battering: they were cheering for the Germans. “Let these boys take a whipping and let them crawl beg us to come and fight on their behest.”
It represents the absolute boiling point of colonial resentment.To understand why a soldier would watch their own nominal “allies” get torn apart by the enemy and feel a sense of vindictive satisfaction, you have to look at the psychological breaking point the Indians reached under British command at Monte Cassino.
The UK and other allies including US and Poles/French continued to lose soldiers to the British high command cowardly tactics until Indian divisions were brought in to spearhead the REAL breakthroughs.
On the front lines, British officers who treated Indians like second-class citizens in the camps suddenly had to plead with Indian regiments to go up into the “Hangman’s Hill” or the death traps of the Cassino ridges to save them. The Indians took immense pride in knowing that the British Empire’s survival in Italy was entirely dependent on Indian help. We taunted them while saving their miserable lives. It was absolute pleasure and delight. Were those British bastards grateful? Never.
Another related taunt which I have been told was frequently used by Indians against British soldiers: “Go crawl back to your mummies’ wombs…”
This specific insult is a classic, cutting Punjabi/North Indian style of taunt translated into the field. In the warrior cultures of the Indian Army regiments, a real man proved himself through stoicism, physical endurance, and martial skill.
The Indians soldiers viewed many of the conscripted, urban British Tommies as soft, whiny, and mentally fragile under the horrific conditions of the Italian winter. By telling them they weren’t “men enough” and needed to run back to their mothers, the Indians inverted the colonial hierarchy, positioning themselves as the true, hardened men and the British as weak boys playing at war.
Resentment was also over field promotions. Indian soldiers resented the “King’s Commissioned Officers” (white British officers) who were often younger, less experienced, but automatically outranked highly veteran Indian Viceroy’s Commissioned Officers (VCOs). Field promotions for Indian soldiers were harder to secure, and their acts of valour were heavily scrutinized or downgraded compared to the Tommies which bred resentment.
Rations were segregated and highly unequal. British troops received better cigarettes, meat, and luxury allocations. Indian troops, who had strict dietary requirements (such as halal/jhatka meat or vegetarian needs), often faced shortages or were given substandard supplies. Disagreements over who got what provisions frequently boiled over to druken brawls.
When troops were pulled off the brutal frontlines of Monte Cassino to rest camps in places like Naples or Taranto, the combination of alcohol, combat trauma, and racial tension created a powder keg.
Military police reports from the era note numerous drunken brawls and riots breaking out between British units and Indian divisions. The Indian sepoys were fiercely proud and would violently retaliate if insulted or subjected to racial slurs by British soldiiers.
The psychological warfare between the British Tommies and Indian soldiers was arguably as intense as the fighting against the Germans.
Wartime censorship kept these ugly fractures completely out of the newspapers. The British Ministry of Information spent vast resources projecting an image of imperial unity to reassure the public and keep American allies confident. Admitting that the men holding the line at Monte Cassino were actively brawling with each other in the mud would have shattered that illusion.
—
2) I will talk about Singapore again some other day but it also has more “fun” episodes between Indians and UK/Australian troops. Some “Commonwealth” unity there. When Singapore fell, tens of thousands of abandoned Indian sepoys decided they were completely done fighting to save the skin of the British and Australians, and instead turned their guns against the British Empire, although it was more in a metaphorical sense rather than kill their British commanders.
The root of the Indian soldier’s hatred for the British and Australian troops in SE Asia stems from the sheer incompetence and cowardice displayed by the Allied high command during the Japanese invasion.
Indian soldiers quickly realized they were being used as disposable “meat shields.” During the retreats down the Malayan peninsula, British and Australian troops frequently commandeered all available vehicles, trucks, and trains, leaving Indian infantry units to march on foot through the jungle, cut off and abandoned to be slaughtered or captured by the Japan. And you wonder why we hate them?
The relationship between Indian troops and the Australian Imperial Force (AIF) in Malaya and Singapore was particularly venomous. While Australian histories often praise their own troops, the view from the Indian trenches was radically different.
Indian soldiers witnessed the catastrophic collapse of the Australian lines in the state of Johore and on the northwest coast of Singapore island. To the sepoys who operated on a strict code of martial honor (izzat), the sight of Australian troops abandoning their posts, panicking, and retreating without orders was the very definition of being “yellow-bellied.”
In the final days before the surrender of Singapore in February 1942, absolute chaos broke out. Deserters, heavily including armed Australian soldiers, rushed the docks, forced their way onto evacuation ships at gunpoint, and shoved aside civilians, women, and wounded soldiers. Indian sepoys, who were left behind to face the brutal Japanese captivity, never forgave or forgot this display of panic and self-preservation by the Australians.
When Australians used racial slurs against the Indian soldiers, the Indians would openly mock them as the “offspring of thieves and convicts.” They taunted the Australians by pointing out that while Indian soldiers came from ancient, proud warrior lineages and noble families, the Australians were merely the descendants of criminals the British didn’t even want in Europe.
Despite the intense hatred and mockery, the paradox of the Indian Army remained: Indian soldiers repeatedly performed miracles of bravery to save the very British commanders they despised.
This wasn’t done out of love for the British. It was done because of the Indian soldier’s profound sense of duty to his unit and his own personal honour. Leaving a commander to die, even a pathetic, incompetent stupid Brit, was seen as a stain on the regiment’s reputation.
Indian VCs (Victoria Cross winners) and even low-ranked soldiers routinely walked into heavy Japanese machine-gun fire to drag wounded British officers and the racist Tommies to safety.
YOU SEE THAT’S THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIANS AND BRITISH/AUSTRALIANS: THE LATTER WOULD GLADLY LEAVE US ALONE TO DIE, BUT WE WOULD RISK OUR NECKS TO SAVE THEIR LIVES. OUR VALUES COULDN’T BE MORE DIFFERENT.
It’s already very long. But as I said, there are TWO versions of events, and we don’t trust the “Tommy” rewriting of history.
Now I’ve given you a real decent history lesson. So you better learn and stop arguing like JD Vance.
Monte Cassino was nothing in comparison to the Battle of the Bulge — it was nothing but a sideshow. The Itais contributed practically nothing to the axis. It didn’t matter whether Italy fell or not, whatever happened there didn’t affect the manufacturing ability of the Third Reich. One Indian division wasn’t going to make a diff. in the European theater.
Imperial JP had no interest in India whatsoever, it was outside their sphere of influence and didn’t have the raw materials they needed to keep their war machine going. Imperial JP was hardly afraid of India. They could’ve bombed your coastal cities and ports flat w/their aircraft carriers and there would’ve been nothing India could’ve done about it.
India’s casualties in WW2 were nothing in comparison to what the US, GB suffered. JP tried to turn India AGAINST the allies and there were politicians in India who were interested.
All right, ye white supremacist. Enough defending your Anglo-Saxon race.
Stop it or I might have to kill you in a fit of rage! That would have certainly happened if we were both in prison! (Rhetorical thoughts only. Just laugh it😂 off in your supremacist tone.)
Anglo motherfuckers and their supremacy piss me off big time, but ironically I spend most of my time around those same evil bastards.
There are a few unique good humane qualities of the Anglo race such as zero tolerance for slavery (probably the only race on the planet that possesses this virtue), and I give respect where it’s due.
Now go back to your Klan meeting. I’ll see you another day.
Blah, blah, blah, time to play the racism card, the weakest one in the deck.
The nazis have nothing on the moslames, it would’ve been far better if India had thrown the Brits and the moslames out during WW2.
NJOI your islamic future in the Indian sub-continent, at least you can find some cold comfort in the fact it won’t be whitey keeping you down.
Sofia2gsays
I think the Muslims always know how to take advantage of our Christian and Jewish mindset not to like killing and to try to make peaceful agreements.
That’s what the Palestinians do and always cry for their victims when it is clear that Israel does very targeted offenses, while on the other hand they kill anyone indiscriminately, with random attacks.
The same was true with Iran’s attacks. And the reason Israel hasn’t had a great number of casualties is that they protect their population, not that the attacks were light.
I believe that President Trump genuinely does not like wars and cares about people being killed. So, the Iranians delayed him with endless talks about peace because they knew he had a limited time for war. They knew the USA would host the Soccer World Cup, they knew there would be the celebrations for the 250 years and they knew about the midterms. All these occasions make it difficult for the USA to be entangled in a war.
So, I think that now is the time for us to keep our mouth shut to criticism and open it to pray even more fervently, for God’s guidance and intervention. Iran is a great stronghold of Islam, and the spiritual battle is enormous. Therefore, enormous pressure will come and we should not abandon the President during this pressure.
Let’s pray for the President to receive spiritual guidance that will make him to never again say that without him Israel wouldn’t survive [to me this is the most worrying statement because it flies in the face of God]. Thank God that Marco Rubio is still holding in faith, and may God give JD Vance the clarity in his faith. Let’s pray that the Christians and Jews in Iran and the people of Israel will be visited mightily by God’s Spirit, and all will turn well, much better than the President thinks when he says that, or what we can imagine.
I still have hopes that Trump will go in for the final kill as the mullahs will never abide by the terms of the agreement despite the fact that they get most of the benefits…even if he has to wait until after the midterms.
I just read that the Iranians closed the Strait of Hormuz due to Israeli supposed violation of the ceasefire. Trump had repeatedly claimed to have total control over the strait. Good grief. It just gets messier and messier.
I’m betting that Vance is eschatilogically a preterest and replacement theology fool!!! That would fully account for his twisted influence on Trump and Paula white is a preterist so there you have it “ISRAEL HAS BEEN REPLACED AS GODS CHOSEN! No need to consider them as important in any way”! That would explain so clearly why Trump has so turned against Israel… he is DONE and America is in big trouble
Trump was right to start the war. Having won the fighting, he then chose to surrender to Iran, hence the MOU. Vance was opposed to the war and had a hand in the US surrender to Iran. If Vance was in charge of negotiations with the British during the American Revolution, then the US would still be a British colony.
As for the “60 day ceasefire” and MOU, they are being bought and paid for with the blood of Israelis, Persians, Lebanese, and countless others.
Lastly, the White House is big on sacrificing Israeli blood, not US blood. Witness, the IDF personnel killed in Lebanon today.
I was a QB for HS football, and this reminds me of debates in the huddle. We need to get with the next play ASAP , because the play clock is running.
I have been pissed about these 60 day BS “kick the can” drills but it is what it is, and now we’re near the execution of more serious bombing of major infrastructure targets.
That’s what I’m hoping for, and DJT has painted himself into a corner with appeasing these thugs.
Excellent post and comments! Trump has bungled the Iran issue and embarrassed himself enough, though he’s too vain to see it. He should turn the leadership position on the matter over to Netanyahu who knows more about Islam than Trump ever will.
He doesn’t have to sign the final agreement. But his ego will probably prevent that.
Unfortunately, regardless of what the final agreement says, it will mean nothing to the Islamic leaders who are already showing themselves to be no different than the previous ones. They are willing to play the game of “negotiating” in order to buy time to rebuild and fully resume the jihad. Netanyahu knows this; Trump is naive, self-absorbed, and clueless.
He wrote “The Art of the Deal” and now it’s the one thing he can’t seem to make.
What do you expect when you put a cowboy like JD Vance in any important position? To think of him as the next US President, every country in the world will take advantage of his incompetence.
India will support Israel even if no other country does. We love the Jewish people.
In case you’re surrounded by enemies totally, we will form an iron shield around your borders to protect you.
During the first World War, it was Indian troops secured and rescued Haifa.
The date was September 23, 1918, during World War I. Troops from the Jodhpur, Mysore, and Hyderabad Lancers (part of the 15th Imperial Service Cavalry Brigade of India) made history with a daring cavalry charge, capturing the city of Haifa from Ottoman and German forces. That city has remained under Jewish control ever since.
The Israelis still commemorate that occasion.
Yes, India and Israel have established great trade relations too. I think they are now manufacturing weapons for Israel.
The Haifa cavalry charge is known as one of the last episodes of cavalry units being used in regular battle.
The Ottoman Turks and Germans were in their secure trenches with access to machine guns.
The Indian cavalry units charged daringly on their horses without any care in the world, wielding lances and swords.
It was s straight-up contest between medieval weaponry vs. Modern artillery.
400 years of Ottoman rule over Haifa ended under just 1 hour. Lots of German POWs.As India was under British rule in 1918, the Brits took all credit for the victory.
It’s only recently the Israelis have revised their school textbooks to name Indians as the liberators of Haifa.
I can tell you had India been independent in 1918, we would have taken care of that crazy bastard Adolf Hitler before he could play genocide games.
I didn’t know that. Thanks.
“I can tell you had India been independent in 1918, we would have taken care of that crazy bastard Adolf Hitler before he could play genocide games.”
How? India didn’t even have a blue-water navy back then. Facing off against Ottoman and German forces in WW1 would be NOTHING like facing the Third Reich — just ask the Russians or the Brits or the French — all of whom suffered defeat at the hands of the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe. India didn’t even have any tanks before 1948, nor APCs, nor an air force. 27 MILLION Russians were killed in WW2.
The so-called Third Reich were no match for Indian infantry units during the Battle of Monte Cassimo that eventually liberated Rome from Axis control.
The 4th Indian Division—which included troops from the 4/16 Punjab Regiment, Rajputana Rifles, and Gurkhas heavily bombarded entenched German paratroopers equipped with landmines, machine guns and aircraft support.
The Indians did lose around 3000 men but they eventually liberated the heavily fortified German military positions. Trust me, Indian troops were in zero awe of the Third Reich or Hitler. They just saw hin as a cartoon villain rather than the most feared man of Europe.
This was only in 1944. Had these elite units been utilized sooner, the war would have been over faster.
On the eastern front, the Japanese advanced through all of Asia including China, Indonesia, Indo-China, and Burma. But they were stopped right at the Indian border, amd beaten back at famous engagements like The Battle of the Tennis court.
In fact, Indian troops defeated the Japanese in every single 1:1 engagement. The only time they lost was when our British and Australian “allies” were like monkeys on the back, taking cowardly decisions. There was a lot of mutual resentment between Indian and British/Australian troops because their methods were long-drawn and ineffective.
On their own if deplpyed correctly, Indian troops would have broken the Japanese back, causing them to retreat from SE Asia.
—
The only reason you don’t hear enough of Indian velour is because of the white supremacists in the UK who wrote history denying credit to their Indian colony.
The only reason British left India was because they were scared of the Indian troops who were so far loyal to the Crown.
In 1857, Indian troops who were dissatisfied had staged a Sepoy mutiny leading to murders 9f thousands of British soldiers in India. The Brits didn’t want a repeat of that history so they decided to quietly leave by 1947.
The thing is Indian armed units had a sense of fleeting respect for their British overlords. But they lost it completely after seeing their superior British commanders surrender without a fight to the Japanese like it happened during the Fall of Singapore. No Indian soldier would have willi gly surrendered to the Japanese, of all people. Many bevame POWs only bevause the UK/Australian Commonwealth monkeys in the back were a cowardly lot.
The cowardice of British officers bred resentment and a lack of overall respect for the British nation.
This is the real history of India they don’t teach you in Western colleges.
India hardly fought the battle of Monte Cassino alone they only contributed one division to the battle and the vast majority of casualties were British and American. The Germans gave better than they got at the Battle of Monte Cassino, 100,000 Poles, Brits, Americans, Indians died there, but only 80,000 Germans. Germany had no air support at the battle of Monte Cassino, the Luftwaffe had already been defeated by the RAF and USAAC. The entire Italian campaign was nothing but a delaying action by Nazi Germany. The real war was being fought in France and Eastern Europe not Italy.
The vast majority of Imperial Japan’s forces were nowhere near India and most of them were in China — even at the bitter end. The IJN attacked Ceylon in the Indian Ocean and neither the RN nor India could do anything about it because they would’ve been spanked by the IJN.
Churchill did try and send two battleships to help out in Singapore — they were both sunk by Japanese torpedo bombers. The Singapore garrison was completely cut-off and isolated — no one could’ve saved them.
Imperial JP had no interest in India during WW2, but if they had, what could India have done against Japanese tanks, airplanes and naval units?
With all due respect and not wanting to sound like a history revisionist, there are TWO different versions of those events.
Both perspectives capture essential truths, but evaluating which perspective holds more weight requires separating the sheer scale of the conflict from the critical breakthrough actions, while directly addressing the historical erasure motivated by colonial bias.
See this constant bickering we willl have on this subject is precisely what the Indian troops would experience on a daily basis when fighting alongside our key “allies” – the UK and Australia.
We did not interact that much with the American GIs however they did use Indian air bases and ports. Our main friction was with the British unit commanders, and also with the Australians in the SE Asian theatre.
My point is the Brits and Aussies rmade very poor decisions (such as Ceylon which you rightly pointed out) that led to constant friction and casualties for Indians. Ceylon was our turf near Indian waters and culturally close to India.
However, the Japanee NEVER did occupy Ceylon. their air raids caused heavy military and civilian casualties and sank several British warships, including the aircraft carrier HMS Hermes. But the Japanese never launched any ground invasions of Ceylon. There were many air raids by Japanese on eastern Indian cities like Calcutta, and people died. That’s a separate topic.
My main point in all this is that it was a nightmare dealing with the UK/Australian troops on a daily basis. With “allies” like those Brfts and their convict descendants south of the Antipodes, who really needs enemies.
Anyway, back to your queries:
1) Momte Cassimo – You are right that more Brits died in Monte Cassimo and the oevrall war, but so did at least 3000 Indians.
For what? Liberating Italy. Why should we have bothered with that place? As much as we hated the Brits, we understood that destroying the Fascists in Italy and the German Nazis was the only honourable thing. We understood European civilians were suffering, and we pledged ourselves to help them out.
Plus Indian troops under various provinces and princely states had already pledged their loyalty to the King of England It would have been dishonourable to go back on that word.
The Indian version of this event is that Indian troops played the main role in breaking the Gustav Line. It is highly accurate when looking at specific, decisive breakthrough sectors during the final offensive (Operation Diadem).
The Core Action: The 8th Indian infantry division was tasked with the exceptionally dangerous job of forcing a crossing over the Rapido River. They did so under catastrophic German artillery fire, established a bridgehead, and launched the armored push that effectively unhinged the southern flank of the Gustav Line.
Concurrently, the 4th Indian Division (famous “Red Eagles”) bore the brunt of the horrific, near-impossible uphill fighting on the ridges surrounding the monastery during the earlier offensives.
Without the specific tactical success of the Indian divisions crossing the river and securing the high ground, the wider Allied breakthrough would have never happened without leading to more massive casualties.
You think the British commanders would thank us after we helped clear the passage for them? While senior Allied commanders like Field Marshal Wavell highly praised the 4th Indian Division, the relationship between the ordinary soldiers in the trenches was anything but friendly.
You have to understand the psychology of Indian soldiers in Italy. Most of them only fought because of regimental pride (izzat) and a direct oath of loyalty (namak) pledged to the King-Emperor.
The British “Tommie” (the working-class British private), however, was right in front of them. Indian soldiers frequently viewed British soldiers as undisciplined, loud, stupid. racist, and culturally insensitive.
Conversely, British soldiers often carried the deep-seated racial prejudices of the colonial Empire, viewing Indians as racially inferior “savages” rather than military equals. They saw us as natural fighters but intellectually simple, superstitious, and emotionally primal.
I get it the Brits often used terms like “superstitious” or “savages” to cope with their own deep-seated insecurities. On the sheer, vertical rock faces of Monte Cassino, standard British infantry tactics failed miserably. The Indian and Gurkha troops easily out-manoeuvered and outperformed the British units in the hills.
The British resentment against Indian troops existed despite the decisive breaking of Gustav Line which was physically and tactically impossible for the Brits.
For many of these reasons, the Indians used to taunt the Tommies accordingly, that “they lacked balls and courage” which led to frequent brawls and in-fighting.
Indian soldiers were fully aware that the entire British war effort in Italy was on life support without them, and they absolutely refused to accept the “dumb colonial” role. We hit the British Tommies exactly where it hurt most: their manhood and their military incompetence.
A standard taunt Indians would use is: “Without us, you could not have won…” This wasn’t just a taunt; it was an undeniable reality that Indian troops threw in the faces of British soldiers during arguments in the trenches and rest camps. The Indians watched British units stall, panic, and take heavy losses on the Rapido River and the Cassino ridges.
Sometimes the Indians would even laugh while the British were taking a battering: they were cheering for the Germans. “Let these boys take a whipping and let them crawl beg us to come and fight on their behest.”
It represents the absolute boiling point of colonial resentment.To understand why a soldier would watch their own nominal “allies” get torn apart by the enemy and feel a sense of vindictive satisfaction, you have to look at the psychological breaking point the Indians reached under British command at Monte Cassino.
The UK and other allies including US and Poles/French continued to lose soldiers to the British high command cowardly tactics until Indian divisions were brought in to spearhead the REAL breakthroughs.
On the front lines, British officers who treated Indians like second-class citizens in the camps suddenly had to plead with Indian regiments to go up into the “Hangman’s Hill” or the death traps of the Cassino ridges to save them. The Indians took immense pride in knowing that the British Empire’s survival in Italy was entirely dependent on Indian help. We taunted them while saving their miserable lives. It was absolute pleasure and delight. Were those British bastards grateful? Never.
Another related taunt which I have been told was frequently used by Indians against British soldiers: “Go crawl back to your mummies’ wombs…”
This specific insult is a classic, cutting Punjabi/North Indian style of taunt translated into the field. In the warrior cultures of the Indian Army regiments, a real man proved himself through stoicism, physical endurance, and martial skill.
The Indians soldiers viewed many of the conscripted, urban British Tommies as soft, whiny, and mentally fragile under the horrific conditions of the Italian winter. By telling them they weren’t “men enough” and needed to run back to their mothers, the Indians inverted the colonial hierarchy, positioning themselves as the true, hardened men and the British as weak boys playing at war.
Resentment was also over field promotions. Indian soldiers resented the “King’s Commissioned Officers” (white British officers) who were often younger, less experienced, but automatically outranked highly veteran Indian Viceroy’s Commissioned Officers (VCOs). Field promotions for Indian soldiers were harder to secure, and their acts of valour were heavily scrutinized or downgraded compared to the Tommies which bred resentment.
Rations were segregated and highly unequal. British troops received better cigarettes, meat, and luxury allocations. Indian troops, who had strict dietary requirements (such as halal/jhatka meat or vegetarian needs), often faced shortages or were given substandard supplies. Disagreements over who got what provisions frequently boiled over to druken brawls.
When troops were pulled off the brutal frontlines of Monte Cassino to rest camps in places like Naples or Taranto, the combination of alcohol, combat trauma, and racial tension created a powder keg.
Military police reports from the era note numerous drunken brawls and riots breaking out between British units and Indian divisions. The Indian sepoys were fiercely proud and would violently retaliate if insulted or subjected to racial slurs by British soldiiers.
The psychological warfare between the British Tommies and Indian soldiers was arguably as intense as the fighting against the Germans.
Wartime censorship kept these ugly fractures completely out of the newspapers. The British Ministry of Information spent vast resources projecting an image of imperial unity to reassure the public and keep American allies confident. Admitting that the men holding the line at Monte Cassino were actively brawling with each other in the mud would have shattered that illusion.
—
2) I will talk about Singapore again some other day but it also has more “fun” episodes between Indians and UK/Australian troops. Some “Commonwealth” unity there. When Singapore fell, tens of thousands of abandoned Indian sepoys decided they were completely done fighting to save the skin of the British and Australians, and instead turned their guns against the British Empire, although it was more in a metaphorical sense rather than kill their British commanders.
The root of the Indian soldier’s hatred for the British and Australian troops in SE Asia stems from the sheer incompetence and cowardice displayed by the Allied high command during the Japanese invasion.
Indian soldiers quickly realized they were being used as disposable “meat shields.” During the retreats down the Malayan peninsula, British and Australian troops frequently commandeered all available vehicles, trucks, and trains, leaving Indian infantry units to march on foot through the jungle, cut off and abandoned to be slaughtered or captured by the Japan. And you wonder why we hate them?
The relationship between Indian troops and the Australian Imperial Force (AIF) in Malaya and Singapore was particularly venomous. While Australian histories often praise their own troops, the view from the Indian trenches was radically different.
Indian soldiers witnessed the catastrophic collapse of the Australian lines in the state of Johore and on the northwest coast of Singapore island. To the sepoys who operated on a strict code of martial honor (izzat), the sight of Australian troops abandoning their posts, panicking, and retreating without orders was the very definition of being “yellow-bellied.”
In the final days before the surrender of Singapore in February 1942, absolute chaos broke out. Deserters, heavily including armed Australian soldiers, rushed the docks, forced their way onto evacuation ships at gunpoint, and shoved aside civilians, women, and wounded soldiers. Indian sepoys, who were left behind to face the brutal Japanese captivity, never forgave or forgot this display of panic and self-preservation by the Australians.
When Australians used racial slurs against the Indian soldiers, the Indians would openly mock them as the “offspring of thieves and convicts.” They taunted the Australians by pointing out that while Indian soldiers came from ancient, proud warrior lineages and noble families, the Australians were merely the descendants of criminals the British didn’t even want in Europe.
Despite the intense hatred and mockery, the paradox of the Indian Army remained: Indian soldiers repeatedly performed miracles of bravery to save the very British commanders they despised.
This wasn’t done out of love for the British. It was done because of the Indian soldier’s profound sense of duty to his unit and his own personal honour. Leaving a commander to die, even a pathetic, incompetent stupid Brit, was seen as a stain on the regiment’s reputation.
Indian VCs (Victoria Cross winners) and even low-ranked soldiers routinely walked into heavy Japanese machine-gun fire to drag wounded British officers and the racist Tommies to safety.
YOU SEE THAT’S THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIANS AND BRITISH/AUSTRALIANS: THE LATTER WOULD GLADLY LEAVE US ALONE TO DIE, BUT WE WOULD RISK OUR NECKS TO SAVE THEIR LIVES. OUR VALUES COULDN’T BE MORE DIFFERENT.
It’s already very long. But as I said, there are TWO versions of events, and we don’t trust the “Tommy” rewriting of history.
Now I’ve given you a real decent history lesson. So you better learn and stop arguing like JD Vance.
Monte Cassino was nothing in comparison to the Battle of the Bulge — it was nothing but a sideshow. The Itais contributed practically nothing to the axis. It didn’t matter whether Italy fell or not, whatever happened there didn’t affect the manufacturing ability of the Third Reich. One Indian division wasn’t going to make a diff. in the European theater.
Imperial JP had no interest in India whatsoever, it was outside their sphere of influence and didn’t have the raw materials they needed to keep their war machine going. Imperial JP was hardly afraid of India. They could’ve bombed your coastal cities and ports flat w/their aircraft carriers and there would’ve been nothing India could’ve done about it.
India’s casualties in WW2 were nothing in comparison to what the US, GB suffered. JP tried to turn India AGAINST the allies and there were politicians in India who were interested.
All right, ye white supremacist. Enough defending your Anglo-Saxon race.
Stop it or I might have to kill you in a fit of rage! That would have certainly happened if we were both in prison! (Rhetorical thoughts only. Just laugh it😂 off in your supremacist tone.)
Anglo motherfuckers and their supremacy piss me off big time, but ironically I spend most of my time around those same evil bastards.
There are a few unique good humane qualities of the Anglo race such as zero tolerance for slavery (probably the only race on the planet that possesses this virtue), and I give respect where it’s due.
Now go back to your Klan meeting. I’ll see you another day.
Blah, blah, blah, time to play the racism card, the weakest one in the deck.
The nazis have nothing on the moslames, it would’ve been far better if India had thrown the Brits and the moslames out during WW2.
NJOI your islamic future in the Indian sub-continent, at least you can find some cold comfort in the fact it won’t be whitey keeping you down.
I think the Muslims always know how to take advantage of our Christian and Jewish mindset not to like killing and to try to make peaceful agreements.
That’s what the Palestinians do and always cry for their victims when it is clear that Israel does very targeted offenses, while on the other hand they kill anyone indiscriminately, with random attacks.
The same was true with Iran’s attacks. And the reason Israel hasn’t had a great number of casualties is that they protect their population, not that the attacks were light.
I believe that President Trump genuinely does not like wars and cares about people being killed. So, the Iranians delayed him with endless talks about peace because they knew he had a limited time for war. They knew the USA would host the Soccer World Cup, they knew there would be the celebrations for the 250 years and they knew about the midterms. All these occasions make it difficult for the USA to be entangled in a war.
So, I think that now is the time for us to keep our mouth shut to criticism and open it to pray even more fervently, for God’s guidance and intervention. Iran is a great stronghold of Islam, and the spiritual battle is enormous. Therefore, enormous pressure will come and we should not abandon the President during this pressure.
Let’s pray for the President to receive spiritual guidance that will make him to never again say that without him Israel wouldn’t survive [to me this is the most worrying statement because it flies in the face of God]. Thank God that Marco Rubio is still holding in faith, and may God give JD Vance the clarity in his faith. Let’s pray that the Christians and Jews in Iran and the people of Israel will be visited mightily by God’s Spirit, and all will turn well, much better than the President thinks when he says that, or what we can imagine.
I still have hopes that Trump will go in for the final kill as the mullahs will never abide by the terms of the agreement despite the fact that they get most of the benefits…even if he has to wait until after the midterms.
I just read that the Iranians closed the Strait of Hormuz due to Israeli supposed violation of the ceasefire. Trump had repeatedly claimed to have total control over the strait. Good grief. It just gets messier and messier.
I am rapidly losing hope. Israel was right when they wanted to continue bombing the rest of the infrastructure with the US before any ceasefire.
I’m betting that Vance is eschatilogically a preterest and replacement theology fool!!! That would fully account for his twisted influence on Trump and Paula white is a preterist so there you have it “ISRAEL HAS BEEN REPLACED AS GODS CHOSEN! No need to consider them as important in any way”! That would explain so clearly why Trump has so turned against Israel… he is DONE and America is in big trouble
Trump was right to start the war. Having won the fighting, he then chose to surrender to Iran, hence the MOU. Vance was opposed to the war and had a hand in the US surrender to Iran. If Vance was in charge of negotiations with the British during the American Revolution, then the US would still be a British colony.
As for the “60 day ceasefire” and MOU, they are being bought and paid for with the blood of Israelis, Persians, Lebanese, and countless others.
Lastly, the White House is big on sacrificing Israeli blood, not US blood. Witness, the IDF personnel killed in Lebanon today.
I was a QB for HS football, and this reminds me of debates in the huddle. We need to get with the next play ASAP , because the play clock is running.
I have been pissed about these 60 day BS “kick the can” drills but it is what it is, and now we’re near the execution of more serious bombing of major infrastructure targets.
That’s what I’m hoping for, and DJT has painted himself into a corner with appeasing these thugs.
We’re being played! Let Epic Fury II begin!
I prefer Operation “Roaring Lion” (I think that was Israel’s name for Epic fury). Let Israel finish the job.
👍 ^^^ Bonni, whatever it takes, just GIT’R DONE!!
I hear ya! 👍