This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Social Engineering

The article I posted on how "Dunkirk" deliberately overlooked almost all non European involvement in the evacuation of the BEF is quite accurate. The Indian Service Corps was a significant part of supporting the retreat. Moreover, the Indian armed forces were an essential part of the Allied war effort after Dunkirk when the British Army was being reconstructed as a result of the losses suffered.

In the same way the support of the African units was an important part of the whole WW2 effort. The question raised in article posted is "Why are these facets of WW2 ignored ?" Perhaps the uncomfortable reason is that in 2017 Europe is trying to stem millions of economic refugees from Africa and doesn't want to see them as worthy of any consideration?

Again I suggest it comes back to who is telling the story and the picture they want to create.

What’s Fact and What’s Fiction in Dunkirk
John Broich

.. (Much excellent information in the body of this story. Well worth a read)


What’s missing from the film that a historian might add?

In the film, we see at least one French soldier who might be African. In fact, soldiers from Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and elsewhere were key to delaying the German attack. Other African soldiers made it to England and helped form the nucleus of the Free French forces that soon took the fight to the Axis.

Soldiers from West and North Africa were key to delaying the German attack.
There were also four companies of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps on those beaches. Observers said they were particularly cool under fire and well-organized during the retreat. They weren’t large in number, maybe a few hundred among hundreds of thousands, but their appearance in the film would have provided a good reminder of how utterly central the role of the Indian Army was in the war. Their service meant the difference between victory and defeat. In fact, while Britain and other allies were licking their wounds after Dunkirk, the Indian Army picked up the slack in North Africa and the Middle East.


John Broich is an associate professor of history at Case Western Reserve University and the author of London: Water and the Making of the Modern City and the forthcoming Squadron: Ending the African Slave Trade.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/07/20/what_s_fact_and_what_s_fiction_in_dunkirk.html

 
No, there's no need to invent and retell Dunkirk. The Chinese already have their own Dunkirk moment about 1800 years ago, in China.

.

Well there you go the Chinese invented everything, including conflict
 
Well there you go the Chinese invented everything, including conflict

No they didn't invent conflict. They've always been peaceful... all those provinces and 100+ ethnic minorities thought to sacrifice their own inferior culture for the greater Han majority to rule over the land of their ancestors.

I guess they're also first in that white-washing of history too

Seriously, just expanding your horizon McGee... what with being a historian and all.

I mean we're all ethno-centric, thinking our own culture are first and all that. Reminds me of that Luc Besson's Joan of Arch movie... the poster had a tag line that goes something like: 800 years ago, history's first woman warrior defeated the English barbarians.

There's Mulan during the Tang; there's the two Trinh Sisters defeating the Han imperial forces.
 
Last edited:

SUBSCRIBE NOW
  • 43°c
  • 12:29 Dhuhr
Abu Dhabi, UAEFriday 4 August 2017

Four Indian companies were present at Dunkirk


Although not visible in Christopher Nolan's new film, Indians were on the beach and on the rescue ships


The National staff
July 29, 2017

Updated: July 29, 2017 07:21 PM

Soldiers of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps on parade at their camp in the north of England, on September 2, 1940. Fox Photos / Hulton Archive / Getty Images
Indian troops were involved in the Second World War right from the beginning.

Though fully mechanised by 1939, when the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) went to France, it became clear that the British army still needed pack animals for transport.

Four Indian Animal Transport companies – 2,500 mules and their handlers – of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps arrived in France from Bombay (now Mumbai) in December 1939 and were given the name Force K-6.

Three companies of Force K-6 were evacuated to safety from Dunkirk, but had to leave their pack mules behind, giving them away to local people in France. But the fourth company was captured by the Germans. Most of the men died in Nazi prisoner of war camps.

Historians record that during the chaos of the retreat, the Indian forces showed determination and discipline. Troop commander Jemadar Maula Dad Khan, was awarded the Indian Distinguished Service Medal for “magnificent courage, coolness and decision” when his men came under fire from both air and ground on the approach to Dunkirk in May 1940.


Read more: Debate kicks off over lack of Indian faces in Hollywood war epic 'Dunkirk'


His citation reads: “When his troop was shelled from the ground and bombed from the air by the enemy, he promptly reorganised his men and animals, got them off the road and under cover under extremely difficult conditions. It was due to this initiative and the confidence he inspired that it was possible to extricate his troop without loss in men or animals.”

Force K-6 remained in Britain for a time and in 1944 returned to India to join the Burma campaign. By then the Indian army had expanded to nearly 2.5 million men – the largest volunteer force in history.

Indian sailors – known as lascars – on merchant ships and other non-military vessels also took part in the Dunkirk evacuation, rescuing stranded soldiers.

About 5 million servicemen from the Commonwealth served with the forces of the British empire during the Second World War. Of those, almost half were from south Asia.

Despite the film’s omissions, and despite not being dubbed into any Indian language, Dunkirk took in US$2.4m (Dh8.8m) on its first weekend, making it the biggest opening of an English-language film in India.

https://www.thenational.ae/world/asia/four-indian-companies-were-present-at-dunkirk-1.615207

And for a wider perspective..
https://www.thenational.ae/world/as...-faces-in-hollywood-war-epic-dunkirk-1.615115

http://www.open.ac.uk/researchproje...attle-and-evacuation-dunkirk-operation-dynamo
 


Is this Nolan's way of getting back at the Yanks (or following its example?) for their U-571 where it was the yank that captured Enigma?

Where's Mel Gibson and his pom-bashing movies?
 
History is always interesting.. Who creates it, who writes it up, who decides what's important.
That is Social Engineering. Helping to create the picture of world as we want to see it.
The conversation about the movie Dunkirk both here and and around the world throws light on the role of media in constructing history as some would like to remember. Dunkirk is a particularly excellent movie and well regarded because it seems honest and accurate. Clearly there are a thousand other war movies which are bascially fluff and propoaganda.

In that context it would have been good value to have noted the presence of more than just English and French soldiers at Dunkirk. I found another story on how the Indian presence at Dunkirk was whitewashed out of history.

Ashdown tells how father stood by Indian troops

Shares
194

Patrick Wintour, chief political correspondent

Thursday 9 November 2000 10.22 AEDT

Sir Paddy Ashdown revealed yesterday how his father was brought before a court martial for refusing to comply with an order to abandon Indian troops under his command during the Dunkirk retreat.
The order had been "idiotic and disgraceful", said Sir Paddy, who was a Royal Marine captain before he was leader of the Liberal Democrats. His father, who ended the war a colonel, was in the Royal Indian Army Service Corps, based in the Punjab. In 1939 he took a platoon of Indian soldiers and their troop of mules as one of four mule trains to join the British Expeditionary Force in France.

During the BEF's 100-mile retreat in June 1940, the order went out from a senior British officer to set loose the mules and the Indians; the British officers were ordered to make their way to Dunkirk for evacuation, since officers were in short supply.

Sir Paddy's father, John, disobeyed, turning loose the mules but marching his platoon to Dunkirk without loss. There he secured a berth for them all on the last ship out before the jetty was bombed. Back in England, he was reunited with his wife, Lois, but court martialled for disobeying an order. The court martial was subsequently thrown out, according to Sir Paddy.

The Ministry of Defence, when first approached about the story by the Southall-based TV company Zee TV, said its archive department had after two days been unable to find any record of Indian troops at Dunkirk; it also reported it had lost the records of Indian Army court martials. Zee TV located a record of the Indian troops' presence in hours at the Imperial War Museum. The ministry then asserted that the command to cut loose the Indians and mules, made by a single officer, did not amount to an official order.

Sir Paddy said last night: "It may seem that the order was a racist one in the context of our time, but my father thought simply that these were his men, he was responsible for them, and he must bring them back. That was the beginning and the end of it."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/nov/08/patrickwintour


Topics
 


I already posted there were only 1k Indian troops (4 companies) compared to the 400k fighting men. If you prorated on that basis you might see an Indian freckle. This is a nonsense and more or less an insult to the families of the majority who were white men of the British army.
 

With regard the age pension, my guess is they will have to, eventually.
 

Why be so ungracious Tisme? What is the downside in acknowledging the wider role of the British Empire in the war and Dunkirk ? How is recognising the support and bravery of the Indians on land and in the boats demeaning the remaining troops?
Not cool...
 
The real key to delaying the German attack was a deliberate order by the Fuehrer himself.
He considered the British as close to his Aryan ideal as could be. Based on that bias, he gave specific orders to delay the attack and "let them swim home" - in the vague hope the British might see the light and join his efforts to rid Europe of non-Aryans.
He may have had good reason to hold that belief. Not only had the British displayed a similar Superiority Complex (Britannia Rules the Waves) and regarded "natives" from other continents as inferior; but even King Edward VIII, brief as his reign may have been, continued to maintain a cordial relationship to the German Regime.
 
I think it is just the response to relentless manipulation of figures to suit nowadays PC view of the world, which I am afraid you do not seem to see as it fits your "belief";
Non european were an infime minority in dunkirk but that fact does not fit with your view so let's change the past;
Neither Tism or I deny the war effort imposed on the colonies, and while Dunkirk was happening you had millions of colonials including Australians.. being moved into the war forces, but at that stage and in that location, zip or not far from that; sorry;
Not the same story for the liberation troups, the africa war but whatever you can type, facts are still (probably not for long) there
look at VC response previously on this thread to my affirmation, reread what i wrote, reread his answer and "rephrasing of what i wrote".Should I even bother?
It is a sad time for truly liberal and humanist people.Fake news are not Trump's exclusive domain, and they become the norm.
I personally find it worse (sad) when coming from people who probably think they have some integrity (roughly the left) than when rubbish come out of Andrew Bolt and cie.Hope long lost there
Not personal Basilio, I am sure you and others: VC, Pixel are well meaning
One of my grandfather ended up in a prisoner of war camp in Germany after than first wave, I personally met/had holidays, spent weekend as a child with a rescapee of Auschwiz: not that many did believe me, and learnt a lot of non PC facts;
And even here I had for dear friend one of the few hundreds of initial French in exile forces who started with nothing in London, a few boats and no colonial forces then and I tend to have a greater respect for their stories and the facts I learnt than whatever we want people to be brainwashed into .As they pass away, the history get rewritten and selected propaganda newreels are supposed to show me how wrong I am, and how wrong they were? I will stop there on this subject: I have not even seen the movie and am in no way interested
 
I am lost, I am hoping the conservatives on the forum can set me straight.

Howard changed the Marriage Act with no plebiscite? Why do Liberals insist a plebiscite to change it again?
 


Because it diminishes the film, it diminishes everything that the film hopes to convey, but adds racism, partisanship, division, politics, but worse it adds the cancerous 2017 social stigmatisation onto a 1940s society.

In 1940 two nations did something that was extraordinary by that era's standards, but impossible by today's selfish who prefer to denigrate and derogate, who pray at the alter of the individual rather than achievements of the many.

It was propaganda back in the day, but it galvanised a nation and its empire to fight the good fight. We all know how thankful they were that the USA got involved later on, but we also know how much they detested the USA taking the credit for all the hard work. We don't need to glorify 1000 Indians stable boys taking the credit for the many.
 

Couldn't they at least have one Indian extra to show that others were there too?

If it weren't for the French guy in the movie I would still think Dunkirk was all British, and wouldn't have bothered to look up what country it's in - I thought it was Sweden all these years. I mean, France fell in a matter of weeks so I assumed no Allied forces woulds till be there.
 

Really? I did not know that.

Saw a doco some years back and remembered the rain also played a role in delaying the Nazi advances by a couple of days. But I could be wrong.

Yea, Hitler greatly admired the US too. He ordered the Volkswagen be built as Ford and his Model-T was - affordable for the masses. Heard from Chomsky that he modelled his 1000 year Third Reich on US expansion across North America.

But then all these psychos copy one another. All want to build a new Rome and be their own Ceasar.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...