Were British cruel towards the people of the subcontinent?

[MBT 3000]

depends

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Lol.... is there any doubt about it ?

British govt. tested Mustard Gas on Indian soilders who were working for the British.

How can it get any more worse than that ? More more proof is required ?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/01/india.military

From the link that you posted. Were these tests done only on Indians or on British soldiers as well?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Indian tests are a little-known part of Porton's huge programme of chemical warfare testing on humans. More than 20,000 British soldiers were subjected to chemical warfare trials involving poison gases, such as nerve gas and mustard gas, at Porton between 1916 and 1989.

Many of these British soldiers have alleged that they were duped into taking part in the tests, which have damaged their health in the years after the trials.

The reports record that in some cases Indian soldiers were exposed to mustard gas protected only by a respirator. On one occasion the gas mask of an Indian sepoy (a private) slipped, leaving him with severe burns on his eyes and face.

The tests were used to determine how much gas was needed to produce a casualty on the battlefield.

In 1942 the Porton scientists reported that there had been a "large number" of burns from the gas among Indian and British test subjects. Some were so harsh that they had to be sent to hospital. "Severely burned patients are often very miserable and depressed and in considerable discomfort, which must be experienced to be properly realised," wrote the scientists.

Other soldiers were hospitalised for a week after they were sent into a gas chamber wearing "drill shorts and open-necked, khaki, cotton shirts" to gauge the effect of mustard gas on their eyes.

The trials had started in the early 1930s when Porton scientists wanted to find out if mustard gas inflicted greater damage on Indian skin compared with British skin. More than 500 Britons and Indians were exposed to mustard gas.

Alan Care, a lawyer representing British troops tested at Porton, said: "I would be astonished if these Indian subjects gave any meaningful consent to taking part in these tests, particularly as they were conducted during the days of Empire. No one would have agreed ... if they knew beforehand what was going to happen."

Porton officials have argued that trials took place in a different era, during a conflict, and so their conduct should not be judged by today's standards.

The Ministry of Defence could not say whether the Indian soldiers were volunteers in the experiments. It said: "The studies undertaken at the Chemical Defence Research Establishment in India included defensive research, weapons research and physiological research. These studies supported those conducted in simulated conditions in the UK in a different environment."

 

[Nityam]

Shashi's rant against British for destroying India industry and economy is complete BS. Indian GDP increased by 2 times under British rule. Population also doubled.

Data from Angus Maddison, the economist who estimated ancient India had the 2nd largest GDP PPP.

View attachment 520353

From the link that you posted. Were these tests done only on Indians or on British soldiers as well?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Indian tests are a little-known part of Porton's huge programme of chemical warfare testing on humans. More than 20,000 British soldiers were subjected to chemical warfare trials involving poison gases, such as nerve gas and mustard gas, at Porton between 1916 and 1989.

Many of these British soldiers have alleged that they were duped into taking part in the tests, which have damaged their health in the years after the trials.

The reports record that in some cases Indian soldiers were exposed to mustard gas protected only by a respirator. On one occasion the gas mask of an Indian sepoy (a private) slipped, leaving him with severe burns on his eyes and face.

The tests were used to determine how much gas was needed to produce a casualty on the battlefield.

In 1942 the Porton scientists reported that there had been a "large number" of burns from the gas among Indian and British test subjects. Some were so harsh that they had to be sent to hospital. "Severely burned patients are often very miserable and depressed and in considerable discomfort, which must be experienced to be properly realised," wrote the scientists.

Other soldiers were hospitalised for a week after they were sent into a gas chamber wearing "drill shorts and open-necked, khaki, cotton shirts" to gauge the effect of mustard gas on their eyes.

The trials had started in the early 1930s when Porton scientists wanted to find out if mustard gas inflicted greater damage on Indian skin compared with British skin. More than 500 Britons and Indians were exposed to mustard gas.

Alan Care, a lawyer representing British troops tested at Porton, said: "I would be astonished if these Indian subjects gave any meaningful consent to taking part in these tests, particularly as they were conducted during the days of Empire. No one would have agreed ... if they knew beforehand what was going to happen."

Porton officials have argued that trials took place in a different era, during a conflict, and so their conduct should not be judged by today's standards.

The Ministry of Defence could not say whether the Indian soldiers were volunteers in the experiments. It said: "The studies undertaken at the Chemical Defence Research Establishment in India included defensive research, weapons research and physiological research. These studies supported those conducted in simulated conditions in the UK in a different environment."

Considering the colonial history, its safe to assume that the majority of "test subjects" would have been brown skinned Sepoy's.

 

[rambro]

Their attrocities past and present affected the entire world well almost.

Not just one specific region and the US regime took over and protrayed themselves as heroes saviours messiah in movies and documentaries in the guise of freedom and democracy.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Their attrocities past and present affected the entire world well almost.

Not just one specific region and the US regime took over and protrayed themselves as heroes saviours messiah in movies and documentaries.

If you look through their eyes, then a small island colonizing half of the world was no small achievement. So I am sure they would have been proud.

 

[rambro]

If you look through their eyes, then a small island colonizing half of the world was no small achievement. So I am sure they would have been proud.

If u think and act the same and can sleep well at night then it is proudful.

The chinese sailed over long before the european colonist did but no colonization happenned.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

If u think and act the same and can sleep well at night then it is proudful.

The chinese sailed over long before the european colonist did but no colonization happenned.

Yeah right.

The armies of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) brought Islam to Malays but Chinese could not bring Taoism to Malay.

Should Arabs feel proud of bringing Islam or not?

Can you sleep well at night that you were forced to accept Islam?

 

[pothead]

2 words...

BENGAL FAMINE.

 

[Nityam]

2 words...

BENGAL FAMINE.

One word "Sinmo".

 

[LASER1]

The chinese sailed over long before the european colonist did but no colonization happenned.

Historically Chinese were never a Naval power like the UK or other colonials. They had their hands full with their own internal issues. Unlike colonials who did not have much land for feeding their populace or do much business, China or India wasn't poor and had huge land area. Both controlled the world trade with considerable influence.

 

[rambro]

Historically Chinese were never a Naval power like the UK or other colonials. They had their hands full with their own internal issues. Unlike colonials who did not have much land for feeding their populace or do much business, China or India wasn't poor and had huge land area. Both controlled the world trade with considerable influence.

U are wrong about them never being a naval power, admiral zheng he aka ma he (a muslim)

During Ming dynasty Zheng he were put in charge to command of their naval armada fleet around 13th to 14th century, and those ships they sailed in dwarfed those of the european ships like columbus.

He commanded the expeditionary voyage to Southeast Asia, South Asia, Western Asia, and East Africa in early 1400s. Some say they sailed as far as south america but its not substantiated

Visited many local empires and kingdoms along the way, none were colonized. They could easily roll over everyone as the rest of the world were still living in mud huts n backwards.

The chinese naval fleet were the first to reach Melaka port, then much later then came the Portuguese > dutch > british (all 3 europeans ccolonized malaya via melaka port (now called malaysia)

 

[Buddhistforlife]

Short answer, yes the empire was cruel. The arguments you’re raising are not valid at all. You perhaps do not know but in 1947, the subcontinent was much much poorer compared to both today and compared to pre-colonial times (relative to the rest of the world).

I don’t often quote Indian politicians, but have a look at this clip of Shashi Tharoor that went viral at the Oxford Union:

Who told you? The British were much better than the muslim rulers of India. The Mughals and the rulers of the Delhi Sultanate were bloodthirsty maniacs who killed millions of Hindus and raped millions of hindu women. However the British never committed any mass murder in India. They only killed rioters and soldiers. British India was peaceful unlike muslim ruled India which was always unstable.

Dont forget that it was the British who abolished slavery and civilised the world when the arab muslims were engaged in slave trade.

Dont forget It was the Muslims who destroyed Buddhism in India and it was the British who revived Buddhism in the Indian subcontinent through archaeological research.

The British are kind, humble and civilised people. They are loved by everyone except for slaves of the Ottoman terrorists and agents of Pakistanis and Muslims.

 

[Jungibaaz]

The British are kind, humble and civilised people. They are loved by everyone except for slaves of the Ottoman terrorists and agents of Pakistanis and Muslims.

Careful all those weird inferiority and other complexes, as well as other insecurities, that have developed over many ages of tyranny are showing in your post.

 

[Nityam]

Who told you? The British were much better than the muslim rulers of India. The Mughals and the rulers of the Delhi Sultanate were bloodthirsty maniacs who killed millions of Hindus and raped millions of hindu women. However the British never committed any mass murder in India. They only killed rioters and soldiers. British India was peaceful unlike muslim ruled India which was always unstable.

Dont forget that it was the British who abolished slavery and civilised the world when the arab muslims were engaged in slave trade.

Dont forget It was the Muslims who destroyed Buddhism in India and it was the British who revived Buddhism in the Indian subcontinent through archaeological research.

The British are kind, humble and civilised people. They are loved by everyone except for slaves of the Ottoman terrorists and agents of Pakistanis and Muslims.

Good lord .... the british were neither kind, nor humble and certainly not civilized.

They were just as bad as the mughal empire and rulers. One destroyed our civilization and the other destroyed our economy , both destroyed our self respect and way of life.

British committed plenty of mass murder post 1847 where entire villages were killed and men hanged from trees and were refused permission to be cremated or buried. Worse was their genocide via man made famines.

During the islamic invasion, the buddhists were forced to become muslims. The modern day dalit buddhists were due to American education by Dr. Ambedkar and when he wanted a new path for the out castes he did not want to join either the xtians or the muslims, so he had to choose between being a sikh, Jain or buddhist and finally choose Buddhism for various reasons. Nothing to do with the british.

 

[Buddhistforlife]

Good lord .... the british were neither kind, nor humble and certainly not civilized.

They were just as bad as the mughal empire and rulers. One destroyed our civilization and the other destroyed our economy , both destroyed our self respect and way of life.

British committed plenty of mass murder post 1847 where entire villages were killed and men hanged from trees and were refused permission to be cremated or buried. Worse was their genocide via man made famines.

During the islamic invasion, the buddhists were forced to become muslims. The modern day dalit buddhists were due to American education by Dr. Ambedkar and when he wanted a new path for the out castes he did not want to join either the xtians or the muslims, so he had to choose between being a sikh, Jain or buddhist and finally choose Buddhism for various reasons. Nothing to do with the british.

Correction here. Hindus were also equally responsible for destroying Buddhism in India. The Sena rulers, King Shasanka and etc other Hindu rulers were also primarily responsible for destroying Buddhism. The Nalanda was destroyed many times prior to Bakhtiyar khilji's conquest and Shashanka on one instance destroyed part of the Nalanda temple. Also Hindu kings of the Deva dynasty installed a Shivlingam in Bodh gaya, the most sacred site of Buddhism.